aboutsummaryrefslogtreecommitdiffstats
path: root/src/libcharon/plugins/eap_dynamic/eap_dynamic_plugin.c
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorTobias Brunner <tobias@strongswan.org>2014-08-15 15:57:22 +0200
committerTobias Brunner <tobias@strongswan.org>2014-09-12 13:55:00 +0200
commit84337ac8d035a5e61bd2d87dd223af14ac8b5988 (patch)
tree22fff8ad8ab65e6c2b7a27b49516de4519a689a0 /src/libcharon/plugins/eap_dynamic/eap_dynamic_plugin.c
parent90e6675a657c4ffdebc39b23f64922bad81bcc03 (diff)
downloadstrongswan-84337ac8d035a5e61bd2d87dd223af14ac8b5988.tar.bz2
strongswan-84337ac8d035a5e61bd2d87dd223af14ac8b5988.tar.xz
ikev1: Properly handle different proposal numbering schemes
While the examples in RFC 2408 show proposal numbers starting at 1 and increasing by one for each subsequent proposal this is not mandatory. Actually, IKEv1 proposals may start at any number, the only requirement is that the proposal numbers increase monotonically they don't have to do so consecutively. Most implementations follow the examples and start numbering at 1 (charon, racoon, Shrew, Cisco, Windows XP, FRITZ!Box) but pluto was one of the implementations that started with 0 and there might be others out there. The previous assumption that implementations always start numbering proposals at 0 caused problems with clients that start numbering with 1 and whose first proposal consists of multiple protocols (e.g. ESP+IPComp). Fixes #661.
Diffstat (limited to 'src/libcharon/plugins/eap_dynamic/eap_dynamic_plugin.c')
0 files changed, 0 insertions, 0 deletions