Re: Minor IPSec bug + solution

[Martin Bouzek <martin.bouzek@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, 2004-09-17 at 12:27, Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 17, 2004 at 11:26:13AM +0200, Martin Bouzek wrote:
> >
> > > > function. For tunnels it returns 
> > > > 
> > > > tmpl->optional && !xfrm_state_addr_cmp(tmpl, x, family);
> > 
> > Well, I am not expierienced with the networking kernel code,
> > nevertheless I still think the check is not correct. 
> 
> If you change the && to ||, then an ESP tunnel SA marked as required
> can be matched by a simple IPIP SA with the same addresses.

Ok. And would it be possible to check the protocols too (eg.
tmpl->id.proto == x->id.proto)? If it is realy not possible to make the
IPComp/required tunnel to work, it would be nice to mention it in for
example the setkey man page. It could save quite lot of time to some
people. (like me :-) ).