From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Michael Tremer To: development@lists.ipfire.org Subject: Re: PiStrong Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2018 10:08:52 +0100 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <5835369E-F7F3-4F89-8ACA-41DE98F28DBF@rymes.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============2357036713326185538==" List-Id: --===============2357036713326185538== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hey Tom, thanks for that link. I had a quick browser around and looked at the code. It is a little bit chaot= ic because it is not written in a very Python-y way. Everything is in a function and the author didn't use any classes. Probably would have been better written in shell script. However, there are some more flaws in it regarding the strongSwan configurati= on (weakest crypto being tried first) and that is not a good foundation. What is the solution you are looking for? Making RW work with IPsec for mobile devices? Best, -Michael On Mon, 2018-09-24 at 20:59 -0400, Tom Rymes wrote: > Ack. My first thought was that this was for Raspbery Pi, but then no mention > was made, so I sent this message. Further reading seems to indicate that it= is > for Pi devices. Regardless, perhaps some of the work could be adopted to he= lp > improve the roadwarrior IPSec experience? >=20 > Tom >=20 > > On Sep 24, 2018, at 8:45 PM, Tom Rymes wrote: > >=20 > > I saw this on the Strongswan users list, so I=E2=80=99m sure you are all = already > > aware of it, but I don=E2=80=99t know if it has any potential use for IPF= ire. > >=20 > > Tom > >=20 > > https://github.com/gitbls/pistrong/tree/master >=20 >=20 --===============2357036713326185538==--