From: Aidas Kasparas <a.kasparas@gmc.lt>
To: Joy Latten <latten@austin.ibm.com>
Cc: ipsec-tools-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, netdev@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: [Ipsec-tools-devel] ipv4/ipv6 forwarding check
Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 10:05:39 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4181EBC3.3020507@gmc.lt> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200410300506.i9U56Yse005815@faith.austin.ibm.com>
Joy,
Need to have forward policies (which are not specified in RFC 2401 or
any other ipsec related RFC I've read) was like a thunder from the blue
sky to us. There is no way in setkey how to insert forward policies at
the moment. Which of the following directions to solve this problem we
have not decided yet:
1) push kernel developers to have rfc2401 semantics in kernel;
1a) have pfkey kernel part transform rfc2401 semantics into kernel
semantics;
2) have libpfkey generate extra policies transparently to the user;
3) have tools (setkey and racoon) generate extra policies transparently
to the user;
4) extend setkey's syntax to make explicit forward policy management
possible and write docs for all the admins to change policies.
Personally I would like to have (1). This would make setups simpler. I
believe, people with embeded applications would like very much to have
(1) too (as extra policies => extra memory use will drive them mad).
Yet, I have little hope this will happen :-//.
Second least worst thing IMHO would be a combination of (2) and (4).
Libpfkey functions have to be rewritten to generate extra forward
policies, and current functions should be renamed as to provide view to
real situation. Setkey should have a swith which tells to operate in
rfc2401 compliant fashion (generating forward policies) or kernel mode
(adding/removing/showing policies, including forward, as they are).
Oppinions anyone?
Meanwhile, I would like to recomend to abstain from upgrading to
anything above 2.6.9.
Joy Latten wrote:
> I understand there has been discussion and code change
> for checks with tunnel mode and forwarding packets.
> In 2.6.9 with latest patches all my decapsulated tunnel mode
> packets instead of being forwarded onto receiving subnet
> or dropped.
> How do I specify manually with setkey (syntax?), to forward
> decapsulated packets onto receiving subnet?
>
> Thanks for any help.
>
> Joy Latten
--
Aidas Kasparas
IT administrator
GM Consult Group, UAB
next parent reply other threads:[~2004-10-29 7:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <200410300506.i9U56Yse005815@faith.austin.ibm.com>
2004-10-29 7:05 ` Aidas Kasparas [this message]
2004-10-29 7:04 ` [Ipsec-tools-devel] ipv4/ipv6 forwarding check David S. Miller
2004-10-29 7:23 ` Herbert Xu
2004-10-29 8:09 ` Aidas Kasparas
2004-10-29 9:27 ` Michal Ludvig
2004-11-05 10:27 ` Michal Ludvig
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4181EBC3.3020507@gmc.lt \
--to=a.kasparas@gmc.lt \
--cc=ipsec-tools-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=latten@austin.ibm.com \
--cc=netdev@oss.sgi.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).