IPSEC data model #3631
Replies: 4 comments 4 replies
This matches Cisco CLI, but conceptually in my mind the peer belongs to the ipsec connection - not the isakmp protocol below it. Is 0.0.0.0 a dynamic peer? |
The underscoring suggests that this associated with isakmp - an alternative would be: but if isakmp-v1 is one of many supported protocols I would suggest |
|
And this is why I hate IPsec... can we find a way to specify the gazillion parameters in a simpler way? Ideally, we'd use some default to make things work1, and then tell users how to use custom templates to tweak all the nerd knobs they want. I'm definitely not going to run the integration tests to check whether all the various settings work, and if we don't thoroughly test this stuff, it's bound to be broken (unfortunately, I have tons of examples). The only thing I'd go for initially is a preshared key, and ideally that one would be specified on the IPsec tunnel, potentially with a global/node-level fallback that could also be used for dynamic tunnels (should we decide to implement them). Footnotes
|
|
Ill change to model anyway. Working with vti tunnels I found that on-demand copying from global to node on reference keeps transformed topology noise at a minimum. SO what I want to have is on demand recursive copy of the referenced ipsec policy, with full chain of referenced object validated. |
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Please look at this ipsec data model and see what else you would like to see in it (only isakmp v1 for now). Some lowest common denominator algorithms will be added if necessary for older devices.
All reactions