[Openswan Users] Re: OpenSWAN - so dang hard to implement?! Help!

Paul Wouters paul at xelerance.com
Tue Mar 2 12:58:35 CET 2004

On Tue, 2 Mar 2004, Axel Thimm wrote:

> > Then Alex didn't put it in because of the conflicts with 2.6 nat code. The rpms
> > were mostly meant for stock fedora kernels I think.
> For FC1, RH9, RH8.0 and RH7.3 stock Red Hat and ATrpms kernels (the
> latter have XFS, lm_sensors 2.8.x, LVM 1.0.7 and some other patches).
> I packaged 2.0.0dr3 without any further patches. Check
> http://www.openswan.org/development/roadmap.php for upcoming features
> of future OpenSWAN releases.

Ye, I have been scolded by Ken for misleading information :)
I was wrong, openswan-2.0.0 has no NAT-T support. It is a bit confusing since
when using the 2.6 kernel, the kernel support *is* there. It's just some
userland code that needs to be put in. This is going into the 2.1 branch, that
was started yesterday. 
If you really need nat-traversal, use openswan-1 (based on freeswan 1.9x)


More information about the Users mailing list