Subject: Re: [HEADS-UP] IPsec NAT Traversal fixes
To: Emmanuel Dreyfus <email@example.com>
From: Thor Lancelot Simon <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 04/23/2005 12:34:13
On Sat, Apr 23, 2005 at 04:22:24PM +0200, Emmanuel Dreyfus wrote:
> I'll now work on NAT-T for FAST_IPSEC. Why do we have two IPsec
> implementations, BTW?
Because FAST_IPSEC, while vastly better in other respects, doesn't
do IPv6. If that were fixed, we could junk the old IPsec code.
Thor Lancelot Simon email@example.com
"The inconsistency is startling, though admittedly, if consistency is to be
abandoned or transcended, there is no problem." - Noam Chomsky