Re: [Devil-linux-develop] FreeSwan....

[Martin G. <sou...@gl...>]

On March 2, 2004 14:01, Friedrich Lobenstock wrote:
> Oliver Jehle wrote on 02.03.2004 15:40 MET:
> > i would rather suggest
> >
> > 2.4 = freeswan (until a maintained 2.6 ipsec backport is available)
>
> I think FreeSwan will still have the lead in the 2.4 arena. Anything
> backported will probably not be as stable.

Don't write off FreeS/wan just quite yet - some of the developers have forked 
FreeS/wan into a new project -  openswan and will continue their work there.

One of the big advantages I found with FreeS/wan is the documentation and in 
particular the interoperability guides - they've helped me out in many cases.

I'm unfamiliar with Kame, but in my brief reading it appears to be easier to 
configure, but is not as well tested as FreeS/wan. There may still be some 
issues with x509 certs and nat traversal, but I'm sure these will be solved 
in time...

So, I would add my voice to the concensus and recommend DL sticks to FreeS/wan 
for kernel 2.4 and see where 2.6 goes.

Martin