Re: NAT-T, IKEv2, Vendor ID, port floating??

[Francis Dupont <Francis.Dupont@enst-bretagne.fr>]

 In your previous mail you wrote:

   On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 10:22:38AM +0200, Francis Dupont wrote:
   > => in my idea to make NAT detection mandatory there are two parts:
   
   I don't like the idea of having NAT detection mandatory.
   
=> there is the simplest way to get a defense for attacks
on peer addresses. But perhaps you can propose a better one?

   How is it possible to avoid potential NAT-T patent problems?
   
=> IMHO the patent problem is more about NAT-T itself.

Regards

Francis.Dupont@enst-bretagne.fr