Re: VPN question
Alle 19:07, lunedì 18 novembre 2002, Lionel Elie Mamane ha scritto:
> On Mon, Nov 18, 2002 at 07:02:59PM +0100, Andrea Frigido wrote:
> > Alle 13:02, giovedì 14 novembre 2002, Lionel Elie Mamane ha scritto:
> >> On Thu, Nov 14, 2002 at 12:43:48PM +0100, Iñaki Martínez wrote:
> >> While using a free OS is always better, you can use any other IPSEC
> >> implementation, they should interoperate. This being said, some /
> >> many IPSEC implementations support only the slow 3DES (and the
> >> insecure DES), so using freeswan (with modular extension patches,
> >> package kernel-patch-freeswan-ext) at both sides can give you a
> >> significant CPU power usage gain, by using Rijndael (the AES),
> >> Blowfish or such.
> >
> > kernel-patch-freeswan-ext UNSTABLE package or kernel-patch-freeswan
> > STABLE package?
>
> This package exists only in unstable.
I have just installed kernel-patch-freeswan STABLE package, in the "make
menuconfig menu" it's possible to enable Blowfish and other additional chifer
kernel modules.
Do you think the unstable package is the better choice however?
Bye.
Reply to: