[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: (NAT) Re: Interactions between IPSEC and NAT
-----Original Message-----
From: Ben Rogers <ben@Ascend.COM>
To: bound@zk3.dec.com <bound@zk3.dec.com>
Cc: Alex Alten <Andrade@netcom.com>; perry@piermont.com <perry@piermont.com>;
Dan Nessett <Dan_Nessett@tdc.3com.com>; ipsec@tis.com <ipsec@tis.com>;
nat@livingston.com <nat@livingston.com>
Date: 5 февраля 1998 г. 20:51
Subject: Re: (NAT) Re: Interactions between IPSEC and NAT
[ . . .]
:Which makes it sound as if they're planning to be handling such issues.
:I know that one of the important points mentioned in the Washington was
:that if NAT were going to fly as a WG it would need to work around the
:security interactions by modifications to the way we do NAT instead of
:modifications to the way we do security.
:
:ben
If this is a 'hint', it makes NAT people to just give up with
IPsec since they have nothing to do after an IPsec transform is done.
If IPsec wg ignores the NAT one, that actually would affect the customer
base for both technologies.
--Alexei