On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 02:04:43PM +0100, Martin Hilpert wrote:
> i need the ipsecX device for doing the routing stuff with quagga and for
> Firewall rules
I am not sure about quagga, but I used use ipsecX for firewall rules as
well, but if you check out iptables there are new(? old by now) funct
i need the ipsecX device for doing the routing stuff with quagga and for
Firewall rules
--
Martin Hilpert
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 10:03:40AM +0100, Martin Hilpert wrote:
> okay i am a native german speaker so there was a mistake in the last post,
>
> my setup looks like this
>
>
>
>
> Site A ( cisco 1841 ) => Openswan A ( Debian)
> Site B ( cisco 1841 ) => Openswan A ( Debian)
> Site C ( cisco 1
okay i am a native german speaker so there was a mistake in the last post,
my setup looks like this
Site A ( cisco 1841 ) => Openswan A ( Debian)
Site B ( cisco 1841 ) => Openswan A ( Debian)
Site C ( cisco 1841 ) => Openswan A ( Debian)
Site D ( cisco 1841 ) => Openswan A ( Debian)
Opensw
2009/2/16 Martin Hilpert :
> is there a better solution then using Openswan ?
this answer may not be welcome here, from what I read OpenBSD is quite
nice with handling IPSec...
> i hardly need ipsec because of cisco router
hardly? Du brauchst das kaum?
I think the OP wanted to say:
"I d
first sorry for posting german in this section.
i know the fact about the openswan and the 2.6 kernel, but i think that
isn't useful.
is it possible without touching the kernel ( kernel modules are ok) bring
the ipsec interface back in game ?
is there a better solution then using Openswan
On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 02:30:27PM +0100, Martin Hilpert wrote:
Ich versuche einen VPN verbindung zwischen 2 server zu bekommen, das
funktioniert soweit auch nur fehlt mir das entsprechende tunnel
interface, was für unbedingt notwendig ist für Firewall und Routing.
Ich setz immoment Openswan e
7 matches
Mail list logo
