On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 7:20 PM, Christian Weisgerber
wrote:
> And the corresponding bits for iked(8). I don't think we need to keep
> "aes-ctr" for compatibility there, do we?
>
i'm a sitting on a fence a little bit. i don't really mind either way
hence my OK for the diff.
And the corresponding bits for iked(8). I don't think we need to keep
"aes-ctr" for compatibility there, do we?
Index: iked.conf.5
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/sbin/iked/iked.conf.5,v
retrieving revision 1.18
diff -u -p -r1.18 iked.conf.5
On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 12:09 AM, Christian Weisgerber
wrote:
> Is there a particular reason we only support AES-128-CTR ("AESCTR")
> with isakmpd(8), but not the 192- and 256-bit variants like we do
> for AES-CBC and AES-GCM?
>
> If not, and I assume it's just a historic oversight, how about this
Is there a particular reason we only support AES-128-CTR ("AESCTR")
with isakmpd(8), but not the 192- and 256-bit variants like we do
for AES-CBC and AES-GCM?
If not, and I assume it's just a historic oversight, how about this?
Adds AES-{128,192,256}-CTR to ipsecctl(8) and isakmpd(8).
There is no
