NAT-T support for IPSec stack

[Bjoern A. Zeeb]

On Thu, 4 Aug 2005, Matthew Grooms wrote:

> Not sure if this helps at all, but I did some searching a bit to read
> others comments concerning the NAT-T / IPR debate. These two documents
> get mentioned repeatedly and would appear to have something to do with
> other vendors decision to adopt NAT-T support.
>
> http://www.ietf.org/ietf/IPR/MICROSOFT-NAT-Traversal.txt
> http://www.ietf.org/ietf/IPR/SSH-NAT
>
> There was also some mention of a third claim but it was hard to find
> details on the subject. Lastly, some people voiced concerns regarding

ietf.org -> IPR -> Search -> NAT-T

https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/ipr_detail_show.cgi?&ipr_id=88

?

> the application of NAT-T to IKEv2 as the first of the two disclosures
> mention the IKEv1 RFC specifically where the other is quite broad.
>
> I can't imagine anyone is actively defending any patent claims here with
> so many implementations of IKE / NAT-T out there. Would a group such as
> the FreeBSD Foundation be able to help find answers to legal questions
> such as this?

I had hoped to get a clear answer after I heared that NetBSD had
started on this but why does nobody send mail to those people listed
as contacts and asks?

-- 
Bjoern A. Zeeb				bzeeb at Zabbadoz dot NeT