Search Results

Search found 360 results on 15 pages for 'draft'.

Page 2/15 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • As the current draft stands, what is the most significant change the "National Strategy for Trusted Identities in Cyberspace" will provoke?

    - by mfg
    A current draft of the "National Strategy for Trusted Identities in Cyberspace" has been posted by the Department of Homeland Security. This question is not asking about privacy or constitutionality, but about how this act will impact developers' business models and development strategies. When the post was made I was reminded of Jeff's November blog post regarding an internet driver's license. Whether that is a perfect model or not, both approaches are attempting to handle a shared problem (of both developers and end users): How do we establish an online identity? The question I ask here is, with respect to the various burdens that would be imposed on developers and users, what are some of the major, foreseeable implementation issues that will arise from the current U.S. Government's proposed solution? For a quick primer on the setup, jump to page 12 for infrastructure components, here are two stand-outs: An Identity Provider (IDP) is responsible for the processes associated with enrolling a subject, and establishing and maintaining the digital identity associated with an individual or NPE. These processes include identity vetting and proofing, as well as revocation, suspension, and recovery of the digital identity. The IDP is responsible for issuing a credential, the information object or device used during a transaction to provide evidence of the subject’s identity; it may also provide linkage to authority, roles, rights, privileges, and other attributes. The credential can be stored on an identity medium, which is a device or object (physical or virtual) used for storing one or more credentials, claims, or attributes related to a subject. Identity media are widely available in many formats, such as smart cards, security chips embedded in PCs, cell phones, software based certificates, and USB devices. Selection of the appropriate credential is implementation specific and dependent on the risk tolerance of the participating entities. Here are the first considered actionable components of the draft: Action 1: Designate a Federal Agency to Lead the Public/Private Sector Efforts Associated with Achieving the Goals of the Strategy Action 2: Develop a Shared, Comprehensive Public/Private Sector Implementation Plan Action 3:Accelerate the Expansion of Federal Services, Pilots, and Policies that Align with the Identity Ecosystem Action 4:Work Among the Public/Private Sectors to Implement Enhanced Privacy Protections Action 5:Coordinate the Development and Refinement of Risk Models and Interoperability Standards Action 6: Address the Liability Concerns of Service Providers and Individuals Action 7: Perform Outreach and Awareness Across all Stakeholders Action 8: Continue Collaborating in International Efforts Action 9: Identify Other Means to Drive Adoption of the Identity Ecosystem across the Nation

    Read the article

  • Can a Java HashMap's size() be out of sync with its actual entries' size ?

    - by trix
    I have a Java HashMap called statusCountMap. Calling size() results in 30. But if I count the entries manually, it's 31 This is in one of my TestNG unit tests. These results below are from Eclipse's Display window (type code - highlight - hit Display Result of Evaluating Selected Text). statusCountMap.size() (int) 30 statusCountMap.keySet().size() (int) 30 statusCountMap.values().size() (int) 30 statusCountMap (java.util.HashMap) {40534-INACTIVE=2, 40526-INACTIVE=1, 40528-INACTIVE=1, 40492-INACTIVE=3, 40492-TOTAL=4, 40513-TOTAL=6, 40532-DRAFT=4, 40524-TOTAL=7, 40526-DRAFT=2, 40528-ACTIVE=1, 40524-DRAFT=2, 40515-ACTIVE=1, 40513-DRAFT=4, 40534-DRAFT=1, 40514-TOTAL=3, 40529-DRAFT=4, 40515-TOTAL=3, 40492-ACTIVE=1, 40528-TOTAL=4, 40514-DRAFT=2, 40526-TOTAL=3, 40524-INACTIVE=2, 40515-DRAFT=2, 40514-ACTIVE=1, 40534-TOTAL=3, 40513-ACTIVE=2, 40528-DRAFT=2, 40532-TOTAL=4, 40524-ACTIVE=3, 40529-ACTIVE=1, 40529-TOTAL=5} statusCountMap.entrySet().size() (int) 30 What gives ? Anyone has experienced this ? I'm pretty sure statusCountMap is not being modified at this point. There are 2 methods (lets call them methodA and methodB) that modify statusCountMap concurrently, by repeatedly calling incrementCountInMap. private void incrementCountInMap(Map map, Long id, String qualifier) { String key = id + "-" + qualifier; if (map.get(key) == null) { map.put(key, 0); } synchronized (map) { map.put(key, map.get(key).intValue() + 1); } } methodD is where I'm getting the issue. methodD has a TestNG @dependsOnMethods = { "methodA", "methodB" } so when methodD is executing, statusCountMap is pretty much static already. I'm mentioning this because it might be a bug in TestNG. I'm using Sun JDK 1.6.0_24. TestNG is testng-5.9-jdk15.jar Hmmm ... after rereading my post, could it be because of concurrent execution of outside-of-synchronized-block map.get(key) == null & map.put(key,0) that's causing this issue ?

    Read the article

  • Outlook or OWA: How can I convert an e-mail message to a draft?

    - by Beaming Mel-Bin
    There's an option in Thunderbird called Edit as new... which converts a message to a draft. I am looking for something similar in Exchange. Reasoning: We migrated old e-mail of a user from an IMAP server to Exchange. The user had many drafts saved. According to exchange though, the messages are not drafts anymore. My hunch is that, if we find a similar procedure as Thunderbird's Edit as new..., that should do the trick.

    Read the article

  • Problem with setup VPN in Ubuntu Server 12.04

    - by Yozone W.
    I have a problem with setup VPN server on my Ubuntu VPS, here is my server environments: Ubuntu Server 12.04 x86_64 xl2tpd 1.3.1+dfsg-1 pppd 2.4.5-5ubuntu1 openswan 1:2.6.38-1~precise1 After install software and configuration: ipsec verify Checking your system to see if IPsec got installed and started correctly: Version check and ipsec on-path [OK] Linux Openswan U2.6.38/K3.2.0-24-virtual (netkey) Checking for IPsec support in kernel [OK] SAref kernel support [N/A] NETKEY: Testing XFRM related proc values [OK] [OK] [OK] Checking that pluto is running [OK] Pluto listening for IKE on udp 500 [OK] Pluto listening for NAT-T on udp 4500 [OK] Checking for 'ip' command [OK] Checking /bin/sh is not /bin/dash [WARNING] Checking for 'iptables' command [OK] Opportunistic Encryption Support [DISABLED] /var/log/auth.log message: Oct 16 06:50:54 vpn pluto[3963]: packet from [My IP Address]:2251: received Vendor ID payload [RFC 3947] method set to=115 Oct 16 06:50:54 vpn pluto[3963]: packet from [My IP Address]:2251: received Vendor ID payload [draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike] meth=114, but already using method 115 Oct 16 06:50:54 vpn pluto[3963]: packet from [My IP Address]:2251: received Vendor ID payload [draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-08] meth=113, but already using method 115 Oct 16 06:50:54 vpn pluto[3963]: packet from [My IP Address]:2251: received Vendor ID payload [draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-07] meth=112, but already using method 115 Oct 16 06:50:54 vpn pluto[3963]: packet from [My IP Address]:2251: received Vendor ID payload [draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-06] meth=111, but already using method 115 Oct 16 06:50:54 vpn pluto[3963]: packet from [My IP Address]:2251: received Vendor ID payload [draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-05] meth=110, but already using method 115 Oct 16 06:50:54 vpn pluto[3963]: packet from [My IP Address]:2251: received Vendor ID payload [draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-04] meth=109, but already using method 115 Oct 16 06:50:54 vpn pluto[3963]: packet from [My IP Address]:2251: received Vendor ID payload [draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-03] meth=108, but already using method 115 Oct 16 06:50:54 vpn pluto[3963]: packet from [My IP Address]:2251: received Vendor ID payload [draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-02] meth=107, but already using method 115 Oct 16 06:50:54 vpn pluto[3963]: packet from [My IP Address]:2251: received Vendor ID payload [draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-02_n] meth=106, but already using method 115 Oct 16 06:50:54 vpn pluto[3963]: packet from [My IP Address]:2251: ignoring Vendor ID payload [FRAGMENTATION 80000000] Oct 16 06:50:54 vpn pluto[3963]: packet from [My IP Address]:2251: received Vendor ID payload [Dead Peer Detection] Oct 16 06:50:54 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[5] [My IP Address] #5: responding to Main Mode from unknown peer [My IP Address] Oct 16 06:50:54 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[5] [My IP Address] #5: transition from state STATE_MAIN_R0 to state STATE_MAIN_R1 Oct 16 06:50:54 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[5] [My IP Address] #5: STATE_MAIN_R1: sent MR1, expecting MI2 Oct 16 06:50:55 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[5] [My IP Address] #5: NAT-Traversal: Result using draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike (MacOS X): peer is NATed Oct 16 06:50:55 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[5] [My IP Address] #5: transition from state STATE_MAIN_R1 to state STATE_MAIN_R2 Oct 16 06:50:55 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[5] [My IP Address] #5: STATE_MAIN_R2: sent MR2, expecting MI3 Oct 16 06:50:55 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[5] [My IP Address] #5: ignoring informational payload, type IPSEC_INITIAL_CONTACT msgid=00000000 Oct 16 06:50:55 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[5] [My IP Address] #5: Main mode peer ID is ID_IPV4_ADDR: '192.168.12.52' Oct 16 06:50:55 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[5] [My IP Address] #5: switched from "L2TP-PSK-NAT" to "L2TP-PSK-NAT" Oct 16 06:50:55 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[6] [My IP Address] #5: deleting connection "L2TP-PSK-NAT" instance with peer [My IP Address] {isakmp=#0/ipsec=#0} Oct 16 06:50:55 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[6] [My IP Address] #5: transition from state STATE_MAIN_R2 to state STATE_MAIN_R3 Oct 16 06:50:55 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[6] [My IP Address] #5: new NAT mapping for #5, was [My IP Address]:2251, now [My IP Address]:2847 Oct 16 06:50:55 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[6] [My IP Address] #5: STATE_MAIN_R3: sent MR3, ISAKMP SA established {auth=OAKLEY_PRESHARED_KEY cipher=aes_256 prf=oakley_sha group=modp1024} Oct 16 06:50:55 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[6] [My IP Address] #5: Dead Peer Detection (RFC 3706): enabled Oct 16 06:50:56 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[6] [My IP Address] #5: the peer proposed: [My Server IP Address]/32:17/1701 -> 192.168.12.52/32:17/0 Oct 16 06:50:56 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[6] [My IP Address] #5: NAT-Traversal: received 2 NAT-OA. using first, ignoring others Oct 16 06:50:56 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[6] [My IP Address] #6: responding to Quick Mode proposal {msgid:8579b1fb} Oct 16 06:50:56 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[6] [My IP Address] #6: us: [My Server IP Address]<[My Server IP Address]>:17/1701 Oct 16 06:50:56 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[6] [My IP Address] #6: them: [My IP Address][192.168.12.52]:17/65280===192.168.12.52/32 Oct 16 06:50:56 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[6] [My IP Address] #6: transition from state STATE_QUICK_R0 to state STATE_QUICK_R1 Oct 16 06:50:56 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[6] [My IP Address] #6: STATE_QUICK_R1: sent QR1, inbound IPsec SA installed, expecting QI2 Oct 16 06:50:56 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[6] [My IP Address] #6: Dead Peer Detection (RFC 3706): enabled Oct 16 06:50:56 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[6] [My IP Address] #6: transition from state STATE_QUICK_R1 to state STATE_QUICK_R2 Oct 16 06:50:56 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[6] [My IP Address] #6: STATE_QUICK_R2: IPsec SA established transport mode {ESP=>0x08bda158 <0x4920a374 xfrm=AES_256-HMAC_SHA1 NATOA=192.168.12.52 NATD=[My IP Address]:2847 DPD=enabled} Oct 16 06:51:16 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[6] [My IP Address] #5: received Delete SA(0x08bda158) payload: deleting IPSEC State #6 Oct 16 06:51:16 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[6] [My IP Address] #5: ERROR: netlink XFRM_MSG_DELPOLICY response for flow eroute_connection delete included errno 2: No such file or directory Oct 16 06:51:16 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[6] [My IP Address] #5: received and ignored informational message Oct 16 06:51:16 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[6] [My IP Address] #5: received Delete SA payload: deleting ISAKMP State #5 Oct 16 06:51:16 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[6] [My IP Address]: deleting connection "L2TP-PSK-NAT" instance with peer [My IP Address] {isakmp=#0/ipsec=#0} Oct 16 06:51:16 vpn pluto[3963]: packet from [My IP Address]:2847: received and ignored informational message xl2tpd -D message: xl2tpd[4289]: Enabling IPsec SAref processing for L2TP transport mode SAs xl2tpd[4289]: IPsec SAref does not work with L2TP kernel mode yet, enabling forceuserspace=yes xl2tpd[4289]: setsockopt recvref[30]: Protocol not available xl2tpd[4289]: This binary does not support kernel L2TP. xl2tpd[4289]: xl2tpd version xl2tpd-1.3.1 started on vpn.netools.me PID:4289 xl2tpd[4289]: Written by Mark Spencer, Copyright (C) 1998, Adtran, Inc. xl2tpd[4289]: Forked by Scott Balmos and David Stipp, (C) 2001 xl2tpd[4289]: Inherited by Jeff McAdams, (C) 2002 xl2tpd[4289]: Forked again by Xelerance (www.xelerance.com) (C) 2006 xl2tpd[4289]: Listening on IP address [My Server IP Address], port 1701 Then it just stopped here, and have no any response. I can't connect VPN on my mac client, the /var/log/system.log message: Oct 16 15:17:36 azone-iMac.local configd[17]: SCNC: start, triggered by SystemUIServer, type L2TP, status 0 Oct 16 15:17:36 azone-iMac.local pppd[3799]: pppd 2.4.2 (Apple version 596.13) started by azone, uid 501 Oct 16 15:17:38 azone-iMac.local pppd[3799]: L2TP connecting to server 'vpn.netools.me' ([My Server IP Address])... Oct 16 15:17:38 azone-iMac.local pppd[3799]: IPSec connection started Oct 16 15:17:38 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: Connecting. Oct 16 15:17:38 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IPSec Phase1 started (Initiated by me). Oct 16 15:17:38 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IKE Packet: transmit success. (Initiator, Main-Mode message 1). Oct 16 15:17:38 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IKE Packet: receive success. (Initiator, Main-Mode message 2). Oct 16 15:17:38 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IKE Packet: transmit success. (Initiator, Main-Mode message 3). Oct 16 15:17:38 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IKE Packet: receive success. (Initiator, Main-Mode message 4). Oct 16 15:17:38 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IKE Packet: transmit success. (Initiator, Main-Mode message 5). Oct 16 15:17:38 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IKEv1 Phase1 AUTH: success. (Initiator, Main-Mode Message 6). Oct 16 15:17:38 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IKE Packet: receive success. (Initiator, Main-Mode message 6). Oct 16 15:17:38 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IKEv1 Phase1 Initiator: success. (Initiator, Main-Mode). Oct 16 15:17:38 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IPSec Phase1 established (Initiated by me). Oct 16 15:17:39 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IPSec Phase2 started (Initiated by me). Oct 16 15:17:39 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IKE Packet: transmit success. (Initiator, Quick-Mode message 1). Oct 16 15:17:39 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IKE Packet: receive success. (Initiator, Quick-Mode message 2). Oct 16 15:17:39 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IKE Packet: transmit success. (Initiator, Quick-Mode message 3). Oct 16 15:17:39 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IKEv1 Phase2 Initiator: success. (Initiator, Quick-Mode). Oct 16 15:17:39 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IPSec Phase2 established (Initiated by me). Oct 16 15:17:39 azone-iMac.local pppd[3799]: IPSec connection established Oct 16 15:17:59 azone-iMac.local pppd[3799]: L2TP cannot connect to the server Oct 16 15:17:59 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IPSec disconnecting from server [My Server IP Address] Oct 16 15:17:59 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IKE Packet: transmit success. (Information message). Oct 16 15:17:59 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IKEv1 Information-Notice: transmit success. (Delete IPSEC-SA). Oct 16 15:17:59 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IKE Packet: transmit success. (Information message). Oct 16 15:17:59 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IKEv1 Information-Notice: transmit success. (Delete ISAKMP-SA). Anyone help? Thanks a million!

    Read the article

  • Problem with setup VPN on Ubuntu Server 12.04

    - by Yozone W.
    I have a problem with setup VPN server on my Ubuntu VPS, here is my server environments: Ubuntu Server 12.04 x86_64 xl2tpd 1.3.1+dfsg-1 pppd 2.4.5-5ubuntu1 openswan 1:2.6.38-1~precise1 After install software and configuration: ipsec verify Checking your system to see if IPsec got installed and started correctly: Version check and ipsec on-path [OK] Linux Openswan U2.6.38/K3.2.0-24-virtual (netkey) Checking for IPsec support in kernel [OK] SAref kernel support [N/A] NETKEY: Testing XFRM related proc values [OK] [OK] [OK] Checking that pluto is running [OK] Pluto listening for IKE on udp 500 [OK] Pluto listening for NAT-T on udp 4500 [OK] Checking for 'ip' command [OK] Checking /bin/sh is not /bin/dash [WARNING] Checking for 'iptables' command [OK] Opportunistic Encryption Support [DISABLED] /var/log/auth.log message: Oct 16 06:50:54 vpn pluto[3963]: packet from [My IP Address]:2251: received Vendor ID payload [RFC 3947] method set to=115 Oct 16 06:50:54 vpn pluto[3963]: packet from [My IP Address]:2251: received Vendor ID payload [draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike] meth=114, but already using method 115 Oct 16 06:50:54 vpn pluto[3963]: packet from [My IP Address]:2251: received Vendor ID payload [draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-08] meth=113, but already using method 115 Oct 16 06:50:54 vpn pluto[3963]: packet from [My IP Address]:2251: received Vendor ID payload [draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-07] meth=112, but already using method 115 Oct 16 06:50:54 vpn pluto[3963]: packet from [My IP Address]:2251: received Vendor ID payload [draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-06] meth=111, but already using method 115 Oct 16 06:50:54 vpn pluto[3963]: packet from [My IP Address]:2251: received Vendor ID payload [draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-05] meth=110, but already using method 115 Oct 16 06:50:54 vpn pluto[3963]: packet from [My IP Address]:2251: received Vendor ID payload [draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-04] meth=109, but already using method 115 Oct 16 06:50:54 vpn pluto[3963]: packet from [My IP Address]:2251: received Vendor ID payload [draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-03] meth=108, but already using method 115 Oct 16 06:50:54 vpn pluto[3963]: packet from [My IP Address]:2251: received Vendor ID payload [draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-02] meth=107, but already using method 115 Oct 16 06:50:54 vpn pluto[3963]: packet from [My IP Address]:2251: received Vendor ID payload [draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-02_n] meth=106, but already using method 115 Oct 16 06:50:54 vpn pluto[3963]: packet from [My IP Address]:2251: ignoring Vendor ID payload [FRAGMENTATION 80000000] Oct 16 06:50:54 vpn pluto[3963]: packet from [My IP Address]:2251: received Vendor ID payload [Dead Peer Detection] Oct 16 06:50:54 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[5] [My IP Address] #5: responding to Main Mode from unknown peer [My IP Address] Oct 16 06:50:54 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[5] [My IP Address] #5: transition from state STATE_MAIN_R0 to state STATE_MAIN_R1 Oct 16 06:50:54 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[5] [My IP Address] #5: STATE_MAIN_R1: sent MR1, expecting MI2 Oct 16 06:50:55 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[5] [My IP Address] #5: NAT-Traversal: Result using draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike (MacOS X): peer is NATed Oct 16 06:50:55 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[5] [My IP Address] #5: transition from state STATE_MAIN_R1 to state STATE_MAIN_R2 Oct 16 06:50:55 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[5] [My IP Address] #5: STATE_MAIN_R2: sent MR2, expecting MI3 Oct 16 06:50:55 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[5] [My IP Address] #5: ignoring informational payload, type IPSEC_INITIAL_CONTACT msgid=00000000 Oct 16 06:50:55 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[5] [My IP Address] #5: Main mode peer ID is ID_IPV4_ADDR: '192.168.12.52' Oct 16 06:50:55 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[5] [My IP Address] #5: switched from "L2TP-PSK-NAT" to "L2TP-PSK-NAT" Oct 16 06:50:55 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[6] [My IP Address] #5: deleting connection "L2TP-PSK-NAT" instance with peer [My IP Address] {isakmp=#0/ipsec=#0} Oct 16 06:50:55 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[6] [My IP Address] #5: transition from state STATE_MAIN_R2 to state STATE_MAIN_R3 Oct 16 06:50:55 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[6] [My IP Address] #5: new NAT mapping for #5, was [My IP Address]:2251, now [My IP Address]:2847 Oct 16 06:50:55 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[6] [My IP Address] #5: STATE_MAIN_R3: sent MR3, ISAKMP SA established {auth=OAKLEY_PRESHARED_KEY cipher=aes_256 prf=oakley_sha group=modp1024} Oct 16 06:50:55 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[6] [My IP Address] #5: Dead Peer Detection (RFC 3706): enabled Oct 16 06:50:56 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[6] [My IP Address] #5: the peer proposed: [My Server IP Address]/32:17/1701 -> 192.168.12.52/32:17/0 Oct 16 06:50:56 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[6] [My IP Address] #5: NAT-Traversal: received 2 NAT-OA. using first, ignoring others Oct 16 06:50:56 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[6] [My IP Address] #6: responding to Quick Mode proposal {msgid:8579b1fb} Oct 16 06:50:56 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[6] [My IP Address] #6: us: [My Server IP Address]<[My Server IP Address]>:17/1701 Oct 16 06:50:56 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[6] [My IP Address] #6: them: [My IP Address][192.168.12.52]:17/65280===192.168.12.52/32 Oct 16 06:50:56 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[6] [My IP Address] #6: transition from state STATE_QUICK_R0 to state STATE_QUICK_R1 Oct 16 06:50:56 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[6] [My IP Address] #6: STATE_QUICK_R1: sent QR1, inbound IPsec SA installed, expecting QI2 Oct 16 06:50:56 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[6] [My IP Address] #6: Dead Peer Detection (RFC 3706): enabled Oct 16 06:50:56 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[6] [My IP Address] #6: transition from state STATE_QUICK_R1 to state STATE_QUICK_R2 Oct 16 06:50:56 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[6] [My IP Address] #6: STATE_QUICK_R2: IPsec SA established transport mode {ESP=>0x08bda158 <0x4920a374 xfrm=AES_256-HMAC_SHA1 NATOA=192.168.12.52 NATD=[My IP Address]:2847 DPD=enabled} Oct 16 06:51:16 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[6] [My IP Address] #5: received Delete SA(0x08bda158) payload: deleting IPSEC State #6 Oct 16 06:51:16 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[6] [My IP Address] #5: ERROR: netlink XFRM_MSG_DELPOLICY response for flow eroute_connection delete included errno 2: No such file or directory Oct 16 06:51:16 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[6] [My IP Address] #5: received and ignored informational message Oct 16 06:51:16 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[6] [My IP Address] #5: received Delete SA payload: deleting ISAKMP State #5 Oct 16 06:51:16 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[6] [My IP Address]: deleting connection "L2TP-PSK-NAT" instance with peer [My IP Address] {isakmp=#0/ipsec=#0} Oct 16 06:51:16 vpn pluto[3963]: packet from [My IP Address]:2847: received and ignored informational message xl2tpd -D message: xl2tpd[4289]: Enabling IPsec SAref processing for L2TP transport mode SAs xl2tpd[4289]: IPsec SAref does not work with L2TP kernel mode yet, enabling forceuserspace=yes xl2tpd[4289]: setsockopt recvref[30]: Protocol not available xl2tpd[4289]: This binary does not support kernel L2TP. xl2tpd[4289]: xl2tpd version xl2tpd-1.3.1 started on vpn.netools.me PID:4289 xl2tpd[4289]: Written by Mark Spencer, Copyright (C) 1998, Adtran, Inc. xl2tpd[4289]: Forked by Scott Balmos and David Stipp, (C) 2001 xl2tpd[4289]: Inherited by Jeff McAdams, (C) 2002 xl2tpd[4289]: Forked again by Xelerance (www.xelerance.com) (C) 2006 xl2tpd[4289]: Listening on IP address [My Server IP Address], port 1701 Then it just stopped here, and have no any response. I can't connect VPN on my mac client, the /var/log/system.log message: Oct 16 15:17:36 azone-iMac.local configd[17]: SCNC: start, triggered by SystemUIServer, type L2TP, status 0 Oct 16 15:17:36 azone-iMac.local pppd[3799]: pppd 2.4.2 (Apple version 596.13) started by azone, uid 501 Oct 16 15:17:38 azone-iMac.local pppd[3799]: L2TP connecting to server 'vpn.netools.me' ([My Server IP Address])... Oct 16 15:17:38 azone-iMac.local pppd[3799]: IPSec connection started Oct 16 15:17:38 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: Connecting. Oct 16 15:17:38 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IPSec Phase1 started (Initiated by me). Oct 16 15:17:38 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IKE Packet: transmit success. (Initiator, Main-Mode message 1). Oct 16 15:17:38 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IKE Packet: receive success. (Initiator, Main-Mode message 2). Oct 16 15:17:38 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IKE Packet: transmit success. (Initiator, Main-Mode message 3). Oct 16 15:17:38 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IKE Packet: receive success. (Initiator, Main-Mode message 4). Oct 16 15:17:38 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IKE Packet: transmit success. (Initiator, Main-Mode message 5). Oct 16 15:17:38 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IKEv1 Phase1 AUTH: success. (Initiator, Main-Mode Message 6). Oct 16 15:17:38 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IKE Packet: receive success. (Initiator, Main-Mode message 6). Oct 16 15:17:38 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IKEv1 Phase1 Initiator: success. (Initiator, Main-Mode). Oct 16 15:17:38 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IPSec Phase1 established (Initiated by me). Oct 16 15:17:39 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IPSec Phase2 started (Initiated by me). Oct 16 15:17:39 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IKE Packet: transmit success. (Initiator, Quick-Mode message 1). Oct 16 15:17:39 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IKE Packet: receive success. (Initiator, Quick-Mode message 2). Oct 16 15:17:39 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IKE Packet: transmit success. (Initiator, Quick-Mode message 3). Oct 16 15:17:39 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IKEv1 Phase2 Initiator: success. (Initiator, Quick-Mode). Oct 16 15:17:39 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IPSec Phase2 established (Initiated by me). Oct 16 15:17:39 azone-iMac.local pppd[3799]: IPSec connection established Oct 16 15:17:59 azone-iMac.local pppd[3799]: L2TP cannot connect to the server Oct 16 15:17:59 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IPSec disconnecting from server [My Server IP Address] Oct 16 15:17:59 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IKE Packet: transmit success. (Information message). Oct 16 15:17:59 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IKEv1 Information-Notice: transmit success. (Delete IPSEC-SA). Oct 16 15:17:59 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IKE Packet: transmit success. (Information message). Oct 16 15:17:59 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IKEv1 Information-Notice: transmit success. (Delete ISAKMP-SA). Anyone help? Thanks a million!

    Read the article

  • How to save email as draft in Outlook 2003 programmatically?

    - by Andrew
    I am working on an VB.NET app which constructs emails programmatically. This app can be used by different people at the same time so I thought that having a "central" email mailbox would be appropriate. The users would then have "links" (not sure of the correct term) to that central mailbox through their local copy of Outlook. I want to be able to save these emails so that all users can see the generated emails in the "Drafts" folder of their Outlook so that they can check the emails first for any errors and then send it off. I was originally simply talking directly to the Outlook app on the server using Microsoft.Office.Interop but have since read that it is not recommended for use in this sort of scenario. Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • how to save the compose message text in draft automatically ?

    - by ahmed
    Hello, we have a vb.net application with send and receive mailing also. Now we have added a session timer of 30 min but the users are complaining that they are facing a problem when they write a long text message or while composing they get busy in something else and when they return back to continue composing message , they are redirected to a session expiry page, and their long text message is gone forever. So I am new to this and I was thinking like , when the user is in compose message the text should be automatically saved to drafts like hotmail. Any help will be appreciated . Thank you.

    Read the article

  • l2tp / ipsec debian Openswan U2.6.38 does not connect

    - by locojay
    i am trying to get ipsec/l2tp running on a debian server with an iphone as a client but always get: Dec 2 21:00:04 vpn pluto[22711]: packet from <clientip>:43598: received Vendor ID payload [RFC 3947] method set to=115 Dec 2 21:00:04 vpn pluto[22711]: packet from <clientip>:43598: received Vendor ID payload [draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike] meth=114, but already using method 115 Dec 2 21:00:04 vpn pluto[22711]: packet from <clientip>:43598: received Vendor ID payload [draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-08] meth=113, but already using method 115 Dec 2 21:00:04 vpn pluto[22711]: packet from <clientip>:43598: received Vendor ID payload [draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-07] meth=112, but already using method 115 Dec 2 21:00:04 vpn pluto[22711]: packet from <clientip>:43598: received Vendor ID payload [draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-06] meth=111, but already using method 115 Dec 2 21:00:04 vpn pluto[22711]: packet from <clientip>:43598: received Vendor ID payload [draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-05] meth=110, but already using method 115 Dec 2 21:00:04 vpn pluto[22711]: packet from <clientip>:43598: received Vendor ID payload [draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-04] meth=109, but already using method 115 Dec 2 21:00:04 vpn pluto[22711]: packet from <clientip>:43598: received Vendor ID payload [draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-03] meth=108, but already using method 115 Dec 2 21:00:04 vpn pluto[22711]: packet from <clientip>:43598: received Vendor ID payload [draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-02] meth=107, but already using method 115 Dec 2 21:00:04 vpn pluto[22711]: packet from <clientip>:43598: received Vendor ID payload [draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-02_n] meth=106, but already using method 115 Dec 2 21:00:04 vpn pluto[22711]: packet from <clientip>:43598: ignoring Vendor ID payload [FRAGMENTATION 80000000] Dec 2 21:00:04 vpn pluto[22711]: packet from <clientip>:43598: received Vendor ID payload [Dead Peer Detection] Dec 2 21:00:04 vpn pluto[22711]: "L2TP-PSK-noNAT"[4] <clientip> #20: responding to Main Mode from unknown peer <clientip> Dec 2 21:00:04 vpn pluto[22711]: "L2TP-PSK-noNAT"[4] <clientip> #20: transition from state STATE_MAIN_R0 to state STATE_MAIN_R1 Dec 2 21:00:04 vpn pluto[22711]: "L2TP-PSK-noNAT"[4] <clientip> #20: STATE_MAIN_R1: sent MR1, expecting MI2 Dec 2 21:00:04 vpn pluto[22711]: "L2TP-PSK-noNAT"[4] <clientip> #20: NAT-Traversal: Result using draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike (MacOS X): both are NATed Dec 2 21:00:04 vpn pluto[22711]: "L2TP-PSK-noNAT"[4] <clientip> #20: transition from state STATE_MAIN_R1 to state STATE_MAIN_R2 Dec 2 21:00:04 vpn pluto[22711]: "L2TP-PSK-noNAT"[4] <clientip> #20: STATE_MAIN_R2: sent MR2, expecting MI3 Dec 2 21:00:04 vpn pluto[22711]: "L2TP-PSK-noNAT"[4] <clientip> #20: ignoring informational payload, type IPSEC_INITIAL_CONTACT msgid=00000000 Dec 2 21:00:04 vpn pluto[22711]: "L2TP-PSK-noNAT"[4] <clientip> #20: Main mode peer ID is ID_IPV4_ADDR: '10.2.210.176' Dec 2 21:00:04 vpn pluto[22711]: "L2TP-PSK-noNAT"[4] <clientip> #20: switched from "L2TP-PSK-noNAT" to "L2TP-PSK-noNAT" Dec 2 21:00:04 vpn pluto[22711]: "L2TP-PSK-noNAT"[5] <clientip> #20: deleting connection "L2TP-PSK-noNAT" instance with peer <clientip> {isakmp=#0/ipsec=#0} Dec 2 21:00:04 vpn pluto[22711]: "L2TP-PSK-noNAT"[5] <clientip> #20: transition from state STATE_MAIN_R2 to state STATE_MAIN_R3 Dec 2 21:00:04 vpn pluto[22711]: "L2TP-PSK-noNAT"[5] <clientip> #20: new NAT mapping for #20, was <clientip>:43598, now <clientip>:49826 Dec 2 21:00:04 vpn pluto[22711]: "L2TP-PSK-noNAT"[5] <clientip> #20: STATE_MAIN_R3: sent MR3, ISAKMP SA established {auth=OAKLEY_PRESHARED_KEY cipher=aes_256 prf=oakley_sha group=modp1024} Dec 2 21:00:04 vpn pluto[22711]: "L2TP-PSK-noNAT"[5] <clientip> #20: Dead Peer Detection (RFC 3706): enabled Dec 2 21:00:05 vpn pluto[22711]: "L2TP-PSK-noNAT"[5] <clientip> #20: the peer proposed: <public ip>/32:17/1701 -> 10.2.210.176/32:17/0 Dec 2 21:00:05 vpn pluto[22711]: "L2TP-PSK-noNAT"[5] <clientip> #20: NAT-Traversal: received 2 NAT-OA. using first, ignoring others Dec 2 21:00:05 vpn pluto[22711]: "L2TP-PSK-noNAT"[5] <clientip> #21: responding to Quick Mode proposal {msgid:311d3282} Dec 2 21:00:05 vpn pluto[22711]: "L2TP-PSK-noNAT"[5] <clientip> #21: us: 171.138.2.13<171.138.2.13>:17/1701 Dec 2 21:00:05 vpn pluto[22711]: "L2TP-PSK-noNAT"[5] <clientip> #21: them: <clientip>[10.2.210.176]:17/61719 Dec 2 21:00:05 vpn pluto[22711]: "L2TP-PSK-noNAT"[5] <clientip> #21: transition from state STATE_QUICK_R0 to state STATE_QUICK_R1 Dec 2 21:00:05 vpn pluto[22711]: "L2TP-PSK-noNAT"[5] <clientip> #21: STATE_QUICK_R1: sent QR1, inbound IPsec SA installed, expecting QI2 Dec 2 21:00:05 vpn pluto[22711]: "L2TP-PSK-noNAT"[5] <clientip> #21: Dead Peer Detection (RFC 3706): enabled Dec 2 21:00:05 vpn pluto[22711]: "L2TP-PSK-noNAT"[5] <clientip> #21: transition from state STATE_QUICK_R1 to state STATE_QUICK_R2 Dec 2 21:00:05 vpn pluto[22711]: "L2TP-PSK-noNAT"[5] <clientip> #21: STATE_QUICK_R2: IPsec SA established transport mode {ESP=>0x05e23c9a <0x216077a9 xfrm=AES_256-HMAC_SHA1 NATOA=10.2.210.176 NATD=<clientip>:49826 DPD=enabled} Dec 2 21:00:26 vpn pluto[22711]: "L2TP-PSK-noNAT"[5] <clientip> #20: received Delete SA(0x05e23c9a) payload: deleting IPSEC State #21 Dec 2 21:00:26 vpn pluto[22711]: "L2TP-PSK-noNAT"[5] <clientip> #20: received and ignored informational message Dec 2 21:00:27 vpn pluto[22711]: "L2TP-PSK-noNAT"[5] <clientip> #20: received Delete SA payload: deleting ISAKMP State #20 Dec 2 21:00:27 vpn pluto[22711]: "L2TP-PSK-noNAT"[5] <clientip>: deleting connection "L2TP-PSK-noNAT" instance with peer <clientip> {isakmp=#0/ipsec=#0} Dec 2 21:00:27 vpn pluto[22711]: packet from <clientip>:49826: received and ignored informational message Dec 2 21:00:27 vpn pluto[22711]: ERROR: asynchronous network error report on eth0 (sport=4500) for message to <clientip> port 49826, complainant <clientip>: Connection refused [errno 111, origin ICMP type 3 code 3 (not authenticated)] my setup looks like this verizon fios actiontec -- DMZ-- ddwrt router -- debian xen instance actiontec : 192.168.1.1 ddwrt: 171.138.2.1 debian xen server: 171.138.2.13 forwarded udp 500, 4500, 1701 on ddwrt to debian xen instance. vpn passthrough is enabled /etc/ipsec.conf config setup dumpdir=/var/run/pluto/ nat_traversal=yes virtual_private=%v4:10.0.0.0/8,%v4:192.168.0.0/16,%v4:172.16.0.0/12,%v4:25.0.0.0/8,%v6:fd00::/8,%v6:fe80::/10,%v4:!171.138.2.0/24,%v4:!192.168.1.0/24 protostack=netkey # Add connections here conn L2TP-PSK-NAT rightsubnet=vhost:%priv also=L2TP-PSK-noNAT conn L2TP-PSK-noNAT authby=secret pfs=no auto=add keyingtries=3 # we cannot rekey for %any, let client rekey rekey=no # Apple iOS doesn't send delete notify so we need dead peer detection # to detect vanishing clients dpddelay=30 dpdtimeout=120 dpdaction=clear # Set ikelifetime and keylife to same defaults windows has ikelifetime=8h keylife=1h # l2tp-over-ipsec is transport mode type=transport # left=171.138.2.13 # # For updated Windows 2000/XP clients, # to support old clients as well, use leftprotoport=17/%any leftprotoport=17/1701 # # The remote user. # right=%any # Using the magic port of "%any" means "any one single port". This is # a work around required for Apple OSX clients that use a randomly # high port. rightprotoport=17/%any #force all to be nat'ed. because of ios conn passthrough-for-non-l2tp type=passthrough left=171.138.2.13 leftnexthop=171.138.2.1 right=0.0.0.0 rightsubnet=0.0.0.0/0 auto=route /etc/xl2tp/xl2tp.conf [global] ipsec saref = no listen-addr = 171.138.2.13 ;port = 1701 ;debug network = yes ;debug tunnel = yes ;debug network = yes ;debug packet = yes [lns default] ip range = 171.138.2.231-171.138.2.239 local ip = 171.138.2.13 assign ip = yes require chap = no refuse pap = no require authentication = no ;name = OpenswanVPN ppp debug = yes pppoptfile = /etc/ppp/options.xlt2tpd lenght bit = yes /etc/ppp/options.xl2tpd ;require-mschap-v2 pcp-accept-local ipcp-accept-local ipcp-accept-remote ;ms-dns 171.138.2.1 ms-dns 192.168.1.1 ms-dns 8.8.8.8 name l2tpd noccp auth crtscts idle 1800 mtu 1410 mru 1410 lock proxyarp connect-delay 5000 debug dump logfd 2 logfile /var/log/xl2tpd.log ipsec verify Checking your system to see if IPsec got installed and started correctly: Version check and ipsec on-path [OK] Linux Openswan U2.6.38/K3.0.0-1-amd64 (netkey) Checking for IPsec support in kernel [OK] SAref kernel support [N/A] NETKEY: Testing XFRM related proc values [OK] [OK] [OK] Checking that pluto is running [OK] Pluto listening for IKE on udp 500 [OK] Pluto listening for NAT-T on udp 4500 [OK] Two or more interfaces found, checking IP forwarding [FAILED] Checking NAT and MASQUERADEing [OK] Checking for 'ip' command [OK] Checking /bin/sh is not /bin/dash [WARNING] Checking for 'iptables' command [OK] Opportunistic Encryption Support [DISABLED] The failed can be ignored i guess since cat /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward returns 1 any help would be much appreciated as i don't have any idea why this is not working

    Read the article

  • Setup VPN issue on Ubuntu Server 12.04

    - by Yozone W.
    I have a problem with setup VPN server on my Ubuntu VPS, here is my server environments: Ubuntu Server 12.04 x86_64 xl2tpd 1.3.1+dfsg-1 pppd 2.4.5-5ubuntu1 openswan 1:2.6.38-1~precise1 After install software and configuration: ipsec verify Checking your system to see if IPsec got installed and started correctly: Version check and ipsec on-path [OK] Linux Openswan U2.6.38/K3.2.0-24-virtual (netkey) Checking for IPsec support in kernel [OK] SAref kernel support [N/A] NETKEY: Testing XFRM related proc values [OK] [OK] [OK] Checking that pluto is running [OK] Pluto listening for IKE on udp 500 [OK] Pluto listening for NAT-T on udp 4500 [OK] Checking for 'ip' command [OK] Checking /bin/sh is not /bin/dash [WARNING] Checking for 'iptables' command [OK] Opportunistic Encryption Support [DISABLED] /var/log/auth.log message: Oct 16 06:50:54 vpn pluto[3963]: packet from [My IP Address]:2251: received Vendor ID payload [RFC 3947] method set to=115 Oct 16 06:50:54 vpn pluto[3963]: packet from [My IP Address]:2251: received Vendor ID payload [draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike] meth=114, but already using method 115 Oct 16 06:50:54 vpn pluto[3963]: packet from [My IP Address]:2251: received Vendor ID payload [draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-08] meth=113, but already using method 115 Oct 16 06:50:54 vpn pluto[3963]: packet from [My IP Address]:2251: received Vendor ID payload [draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-07] meth=112, but already using method 115 Oct 16 06:50:54 vpn pluto[3963]: packet from [My IP Address]:2251: received Vendor ID payload [draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-06] meth=111, but already using method 115 Oct 16 06:50:54 vpn pluto[3963]: packet from [My IP Address]:2251: received Vendor ID payload [draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-05] meth=110, but already using method 115 Oct 16 06:50:54 vpn pluto[3963]: packet from [My IP Address]:2251: received Vendor ID payload [draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-04] meth=109, but already using method 115 Oct 16 06:50:54 vpn pluto[3963]: packet from [My IP Address]:2251: received Vendor ID payload [draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-03] meth=108, but already using method 115 Oct 16 06:50:54 vpn pluto[3963]: packet from [My IP Address]:2251: received Vendor ID payload [draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-02] meth=107, but already using method 115 Oct 16 06:50:54 vpn pluto[3963]: packet from [My IP Address]:2251: received Vendor ID payload [draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-02_n] meth=106, but already using method 115 Oct 16 06:50:54 vpn pluto[3963]: packet from [My IP Address]:2251: ignoring Vendor ID payload [FRAGMENTATION 80000000] Oct 16 06:50:54 vpn pluto[3963]: packet from [My IP Address]:2251: received Vendor ID payload [Dead Peer Detection] Oct 16 06:50:54 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[5] [My IP Address] #5: responding to Main Mode from unknown peer [My IP Address] Oct 16 06:50:54 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[5] [My IP Address] #5: transition from state STATE_MAIN_R0 to state STATE_MAIN_R1 Oct 16 06:50:54 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[5] [My IP Address] #5: STATE_MAIN_R1: sent MR1, expecting MI2 Oct 16 06:50:55 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[5] [My IP Address] #5: NAT-Traversal: Result using draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike (MacOS X): peer is NATed Oct 16 06:50:55 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[5] [My IP Address] #5: transition from state STATE_MAIN_R1 to state STATE_MAIN_R2 Oct 16 06:50:55 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[5] [My IP Address] #5: STATE_MAIN_R2: sent MR2, expecting MI3 Oct 16 06:50:55 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[5] [My IP Address] #5: ignoring informational payload, type IPSEC_INITIAL_CONTACT msgid=00000000 Oct 16 06:50:55 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[5] [My IP Address] #5: Main mode peer ID is ID_IPV4_ADDR: '192.168.12.52' Oct 16 06:50:55 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[5] [My IP Address] #5: switched from "L2TP-PSK-NAT" to "L2TP-PSK-NAT" Oct 16 06:50:55 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[6] [My IP Address] #5: deleting connection "L2TP-PSK-NAT" instance with peer [My IP Address] {isakmp=#0/ipsec=#0} Oct 16 06:50:55 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[6] [My IP Address] #5: transition from state STATE_MAIN_R2 to state STATE_MAIN_R3 Oct 16 06:50:55 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[6] [My IP Address] #5: new NAT mapping for #5, was [My IP Address]:2251, now [My IP Address]:2847 Oct 16 06:50:55 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[6] [My IP Address] #5: STATE_MAIN_R3: sent MR3, ISAKMP SA established {auth=OAKLEY_PRESHARED_KEY cipher=aes_256 prf=oakley_sha group=modp1024} Oct 16 06:50:55 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[6] [My IP Address] #5: Dead Peer Detection (RFC 3706): enabled Oct 16 06:50:56 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[6] [My IP Address] #5: the peer proposed: [My Server IP Address]/32:17/1701 -> 192.168.12.52/32:17/0 Oct 16 06:50:56 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[6] [My IP Address] #5: NAT-Traversal: received 2 NAT-OA. using first, ignoring others Oct 16 06:50:56 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[6] [My IP Address] #6: responding to Quick Mode proposal {msgid:8579b1fb} Oct 16 06:50:56 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[6] [My IP Address] #6: us: [My Server IP Address]<[My Server IP Address]>:17/1701 Oct 16 06:50:56 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[6] [My IP Address] #6: them: [My IP Address][192.168.12.52]:17/65280===192.168.12.52/32 Oct 16 06:50:56 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[6] [My IP Address] #6: transition from state STATE_QUICK_R0 to state STATE_QUICK_R1 Oct 16 06:50:56 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[6] [My IP Address] #6: STATE_QUICK_R1: sent QR1, inbound IPsec SA installed, expecting QI2 Oct 16 06:50:56 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[6] [My IP Address] #6: Dead Peer Detection (RFC 3706): enabled Oct 16 06:50:56 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[6] [My IP Address] #6: transition from state STATE_QUICK_R1 to state STATE_QUICK_R2 Oct 16 06:50:56 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[6] [My IP Address] #6: STATE_QUICK_R2: IPsec SA established transport mode {ESP=>0x08bda158 <0x4920a374 xfrm=AES_256-HMAC_SHA1 NATOA=192.168.12.52 NATD=[My IP Address]:2847 DPD=enabled} Oct 16 06:51:16 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[6] [My IP Address] #5: received Delete SA(0x08bda158) payload: deleting IPSEC State #6 Oct 16 06:51:16 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[6] [My IP Address] #5: ERROR: netlink XFRM_MSG_DELPOLICY response for flow eroute_connection delete included errno 2: No such file or directory Oct 16 06:51:16 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[6] [My IP Address] #5: received and ignored informational message Oct 16 06:51:16 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[6] [My IP Address] #5: received Delete SA payload: deleting ISAKMP State #5 Oct 16 06:51:16 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[6] [My IP Address]: deleting connection "L2TP-PSK-NAT" instance with peer [My IP Address] {isakmp=#0/ipsec=#0} Oct 16 06:51:16 vpn pluto[3963]: packet from [My IP Address]:2847: received and ignored informational message xl2tpd -D message: xl2tpd[4289]: Enabling IPsec SAref processing for L2TP transport mode SAs xl2tpd[4289]: IPsec SAref does not work with L2TP kernel mode yet, enabling forceuserspace=yes xl2tpd[4289]: setsockopt recvref[30]: Protocol not available xl2tpd[4289]: This binary does not support kernel L2TP. xl2tpd[4289]: xl2tpd version xl2tpd-1.3.1 started on vpn.netools.me PID:4289 xl2tpd[4289]: Written by Mark Spencer, Copyright (C) 1998, Adtran, Inc. xl2tpd[4289]: Forked by Scott Balmos and David Stipp, (C) 2001 xl2tpd[4289]: Inherited by Jeff McAdams, (C) 2002 xl2tpd[4289]: Forked again by Xelerance (www.xelerance.com) (C) 2006 xl2tpd[4289]: Listening on IP address [My Server IP Address], port 1701 Then it just stopped here, and have no any response. I can't connect VPN on my mac client, the /var/log/system.log message: Oct 16 15:17:36 azone-iMac.local configd[17]: SCNC: start, triggered by SystemUIServer, type L2TP, status 0 Oct 16 15:17:36 azone-iMac.local pppd[3799]: pppd 2.4.2 (Apple version 596.13) started by azone, uid 501 Oct 16 15:17:38 azone-iMac.local pppd[3799]: L2TP connecting to server 'vpn.netools.me' ([My Server IP Address])... Oct 16 15:17:38 azone-iMac.local pppd[3799]: IPSec connection started Oct 16 15:17:38 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: Connecting. Oct 16 15:17:38 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IPSec Phase1 started (Initiated by me). Oct 16 15:17:38 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IKE Packet: transmit success. (Initiator, Main-Mode message 1). Oct 16 15:17:38 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IKE Packet: receive success. (Initiator, Main-Mode message 2). Oct 16 15:17:38 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IKE Packet: transmit success. (Initiator, Main-Mode message 3). Oct 16 15:17:38 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IKE Packet: receive success. (Initiator, Main-Mode message 4). Oct 16 15:17:38 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IKE Packet: transmit success. (Initiator, Main-Mode message 5). Oct 16 15:17:38 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IKEv1 Phase1 AUTH: success. (Initiator, Main-Mode Message 6). Oct 16 15:17:38 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IKE Packet: receive success. (Initiator, Main-Mode message 6). Oct 16 15:17:38 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IKEv1 Phase1 Initiator: success. (Initiator, Main-Mode). Oct 16 15:17:38 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IPSec Phase1 established (Initiated by me). Oct 16 15:17:39 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IPSec Phase2 started (Initiated by me). Oct 16 15:17:39 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IKE Packet: transmit success. (Initiator, Quick-Mode message 1). Oct 16 15:17:39 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IKE Packet: receive success. (Initiator, Quick-Mode message 2). Oct 16 15:17:39 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IKE Packet: transmit success. (Initiator, Quick-Mode message 3). Oct 16 15:17:39 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IKEv1 Phase2 Initiator: success. (Initiator, Quick-Mode). Oct 16 15:17:39 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IPSec Phase2 established (Initiated by me). Oct 16 15:17:39 azone-iMac.local pppd[3799]: IPSec connection established Oct 16 15:17:59 azone-iMac.local pppd[3799]: L2TP cannot connect to the server Oct 16 15:17:59 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IPSec disconnecting from server [My Server IP Address] Oct 16 15:17:59 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IKE Packet: transmit success. (Information message). Oct 16 15:17:59 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IKEv1 Information-Notice: transmit success. (Delete IPSEC-SA). Oct 16 15:17:59 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IKE Packet: transmit success. (Information message). Oct 16 15:17:59 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IKEv1 Information-Notice: transmit success. (Delete ISAKMP-SA). Anyone help? Thanks a million!

    Read the article

  • Java EE 7 JSR update

    - by Heather VanCura
    Java EE 7 JSR update...in case you missed the last few entries with JSR updates, there are 8 Java EE 7 JSRs currently in JCP milestone review stages.  Your input is requested and needed! JSR 342: Early Draft Review 2– Java Platform, Enterprise Edition 7 (Java EE 7) Specification (review ends 30 November); Oracle JSR 107: Early Draft Review - JCACHE - Java Temporary Caching API (review ends 22 November); Greg Luck, Oracle JSR 236: Early Draft Review – Concurrency Utilities for Java EE (review ends 15 December); Oracle JSR 338: Early Draft Review 2 – Java Persistence 2 (review ends 30 November); Oracle JSR 346: Public Review – Contexts and Dependency Injection for Java EE 1.1 (EC ballot 4-17 December); RedHat JSR 352: Public Review – Batch Applications for the Java Platform (EC ballot 4-17 December); IBM JSR 349: Public Review – Bean Validation 1.1 (EC ballot 20- 26 November); RedHat JSR 339: Public Review – JAX-RS 2.0: The Java API for RESTful Web Services (Review period ended, EC ballot ends 26 November); Oracle  Also, check out the Java EE wiki with a specification and schedule update, including most recently, the addition of JSR 236.

    Read the article

  • RESTful Java on Steroids (Parleys, Podcast, ...)

    - by alexismp
    As reported previously here, the JAX-RS 2.0 (JSR 339) expert group is making good progress. If you're interested in what the future holds for RESTful Java web services, you can now watch Marek's Devoxx presentation or listen to him in the latest Java Spotlight Podcast (#74). Marek discusses the new client API, filters/handlers, BeanValidation integration, Hypermedia support (HATEOAS), server-side async processing and more. With JSR 339's Early Draft Review 2 currently out, another draft review is planned for April, the public review should be available in June while the final draft is currently scheduled for the end of the summer. In short, expect completion sometime before the end of 2012.

    Read the article

  • JSR updates - October 2013

    - by Heather VanCura
    A handful of JSRs have been making  progress in the JCP program--Java SE, Java ME and Java EE JSRs.  More to come in the next few weeks! Highlights and links to JSR material below. JSR 337,  Java SE 8 Release Contents, published an Early Draft Review. JSR 351, Java Identity API, published an Early Draft Review. JSR 360, Connected Limited Device Configuration (CLDC) 8, passed the EC Public Review Ballot with 21 yes votes. JSR 361, Java ME Embedded Profile, passed the EC Public Review Ballot with 20 yes votes. JSR 107, JCACHE-Java Temporary Caching API, published an update to their JSR Community Update Page.  You can find schedule information (plans to submit Proposed Final Draft very soon), Adopt-a-JSR suggestions, and presentation material from JavaOne.

    Read the article

  • JSR Updates and Inactive JSR ballots

    - by heathervc
    The following are JSRs have posted updates in the last week: JSR 331, Constraint Programming API, has posted a Maintenance Draft Review; this review closes 29 September. JSR 352, Batch Applications for the Java Platform, has posted an Early Draft Review; this review closes 29 September. JSR 353, Java API for JSON Processing, has posted an Early Draft Review; this review closes 7 October. Inactive JSRs: The following JSR proposals have been Inactive for at least two years and are currently on the EC ballot to be declared Dormant, following a period where the community was given an opportunity to express interest in their continued development: JSR 50, Distributed Real-Time Specification JSR 282, Real-Time Specification for Java (RTSJ) 1.1 JSR 307, Network Mobility and Mobile Data API JSR 327, Dynamic Contents Delivery Service API for Java ME JSR 328, Change Management API

    Read the article

  • JSR Updates and EC Nominations open

    - by heathervc
    JSR 310, Date and Time API, has published an Early Draft Review 2.  This review closes 14 October. JSR 353, Java API for JSON Processing, has published an Early Draft Review.  This review closes 7 October. JSR 356, Java API for WebSocket, has published an Early Draft Review. This review closes 27 October. JSR 339,  JAX-RS 2.0: The Java API for RESTful Web Services, has published a Public Review. This review closes 12 November. The EC Nominations are now open until 11 October.  Any JCP Member may nominate themselves for the 2 open seats in the 2012 EC Elections.  Note that both seats will be for a 1 year term only, since all EC Members will stand for Election in 2013.  The merged EC will take effect in November 2012.

    Read the article

  • Transform your Oracle Tutor Documents to Your Corporate Standard

    - by mary.keane
    You have all of your company's processes documented in Oracle Tutor, and now you want to get the HTML files to reflect your company's corporate look and feel. How are you going to do this without having an HTML guru to change every HTML page? The good news is you do not need to be an HTML expert to make minor changes to your documents. All Tutor HTML files are attached to a group of style sheets, so any changes you make to the style sheets will immediately be reflected in all of your HTML documents. If you want to give it a try, here's what you do (please note that these tips are applicable to release Oracle Tutor 12.2 and greater): Navigate to your Tutor HTML directory, and copy into a draft folder a representative group of HTML files (don't forget the flowchart image files that are associated with the procedures). You'll also need to copy the following files: tutor.css tutor_notabs.css tutor_scripts.js tutor_tabs.css flow_icon.gif Here's the default look to the Oracle Tutor desk manual. Let's say I want to use my company's corporate style in the HTML documents. At Oracle, we use Oracle Red (FF0000), Oracle Black (000000), and Oracle Gray (666666). So I want to incorporate those colors into the Tutor HTML files. I open tutor.css from the draft folder in a text editor. My preference is to use Notepad, but there are others. Make sure, however, that it is a text editor, and not a word processing program. I want to change the headings to Oracle Red. The desk manual title is listed as the DMPAGETITLE, so I find that in tutor.css. The style names in the style sheets are descriptive, but sometimes you may have to experiment to find the right style (this is why you're working in a draft folder). I change the color attribute to FF00000, and then I save the document. Now I look at one of the desk manuals in my draft folder. I've successfully changed the title of the desk manual, so, now that I have more confidence that I can do this, I start changing other styles. I need to make changes in the tutor_tabs.css file as well, so I open that document. Then I look at one of the procedures. Oops! All that red is distracting, and the users may not be able to follow their procedures. So I go back to the corporate style guide, and I find some shades of gray that have been approved. So I use that, and it is now more readable. It's good enough for a first draft, and I would show it to my colleagues at this point to get their input. On my next blog, I'll discuss how to change the flowchart colors to match your corporate look and feel. Have you used the cascading styles sheets to change the look of your Tutor documents? If so, let us know what you've done in your post. Mary R. Keane Senior Development Manager, Oracle Tutor & UPK Content

    Read the article

  • jets3t and Downloading Files from AmazonS3 with Different Name

    - by Gregg
    We're using AmazonS3 for file storage and recently found out that we need to keep some sort of directory structure. Since S3 doesn't allow that, we know we can name the files according to their structure for storage. For example... abc/123/draft.doc What I want to know is if I want to provide a public link to this particular file is there anyway that the file can simply be draft.doc instead of abc/123/draft.doc ?

    Read the article

  • \center environment centers the whole document in LaTeX

    - by Seamus
    I have the following line between my \maketitle and my \begin{abstract}: \center{ \textsc{Some text here} } This seems to cause the ENTIRE DOCUMENT to be formatted as centered. Why is this and how should I get around it? Part two: Is there a way to get some text to appear only when the [draft] option is active. For example, when the draft option is active, I want some text to appear between my title and abstract: "draft: do not cite without permission" or some such.

    Read the article

  • A new method of supporting FOSS?

    - by James
    I have been kicking an idea around for sometime and wondered if something of it's nature hadn't already been invented. The premise is a website that integrates code management, project/team management, and micro-transactions. Donations, in and of themselves, are a sporadic, and unreliable method of supporting developers. Furthermore most free software that accepts donations is started by programmers ,be it to learn, because of a hobby, or because they saw a niche that needed to be filled. There is no method in place of of saying "hay, the FOSS community needs this kind of software, will someone develop it, and accept donations!?" Programmers should be programming, not busy begging for money. Basically the idea is people can go to the site in question, and start a project or make a request. Anyone signed up with the site can start a request. Each member account is free to support or "upvote" a project request. Requests and the associated number of votes let programmers in the community know the needs of the community. When a project is started a request for developers can be put forth. Developers have a ranking based on commits to other projects. The project founder can send invites to known Developers, or accept invites from members based on developer ranking. Once the project has at least one team-member, an objectives sheet or "draft" can be put out, listing design, goals, and features. The founding member and each team-member may contribute to this sheet. Each "milestone", or "Feature" is represented by an article. An article is any unit of a draft that can be voted on by The Project Founder, Team-members, and contributors...which brings me to the next half of this idea. --Microtransactions-- People signed up with this hypothetical website can purchase credits which then can be transfered to projects they would like to support. Anyone who transfers credits to a project is known as a contributor to that project. At anytime a Founder, or the lead team-member may submit an article, or a design (multiple articles) for consideration. All team-members, as well as the Founder, can vote once for each article freely. Contributors may vote yes or no on a number of articles (independent of any given meeting where a particular design or article is considered) equal to the number of credits they have placed into a contributors fund for that particular project. A contributors fund is a proxy between a sites credit account, and a projects credit account. It is sort of like a promise to contribute, instead of an actual contribution. Contributers may place constraints on particular articles such that if those constraints (a yes or no vote) are satisfied then a manually specified amount of credits is automatically transfered to the project account. This allows a project to develop based on the needs of those who may (in the future) financially rely on the project. --- Code commits & milestones --- When a team-member makes a commit, they may specify if it's a minor commit, a bug fix, a compatibility patch (i.e. for a new platform), or a milestone (an article voted on previously). People signed up with the website, may download the updated project and test it to see if the programmer's assertion is true about the commit. A report may then be filed on a small form, giving a one or two paragraphs, and a positive or negative confirmation of the programmer's goal for that particular commit. After all milestones for a particular draft are complete, a new draft is submitted for voting. Also funds may withdrawn by each team-member based on the proportion of commits and milestones confirmed (fulfilled the stated purpose) for each programmer. --- voting --- Members, contributor, and non-contributor, may make priority requests for particular articles of a draft. The project founder may or may not opt to fill those requests based on the volume of upvotes. A fulfilled priority request means that any team-member that makes a community-confirmed commit for an article is, when all articles for the draft are fulfilled, granted a portion of project credits in proportion to the average priority of all the articles he committed. ---- Notes --- While this is horribly prone to design-by-committee the one saving grace is that the lead team-member may place constraints on a draft such that some, or ALL articles must be voted yes. Commits may not begin until a draft satisfying said constraints is approved. What does SO think, is this idea feasible? Does anyone see major problems with this? Is there any insights, or improvements that could be made?

    Read the article

  • Loading enumerations from database

    - by Mosh
    Hello, I have a problem with mapping .NET enumerations to database tables. Imagine I have a table called Statuses with the following values: StatusID | Name 1 Draft 2 Ready ... ... In the application layer, I can either use a Repository to get all Statuses as an IList object. However, the problem with this approach is that I cannot reference a certain status in my business logic. For example, how can I implement something like this? if (myObject.Status is Ready) do this else if (myObject.Status is Draft) do that... Since the statuses are loaded dynamically, I cannot tell for sure what particular Status object in the List represents the Draft or Ready status. Alternatively, I could just use an enumeration like public enum Statuses { Draft, Ready }; Then I could easily use an enumeration in my business logic. if (myObject.Status == Statuses.Draft) // do something... However, the problem with this approach is that every time the user wants to modify the list of Statuses (adding a new status, or renaming an existing status) the application has to be re-compiled. We cannot load the statuses dynamically from the database. Has anyone else come across a similar situation? Any solutions/patterns? Cheers, Mosh

    Read the article

  • Standards Corner: OAuth WG Client Registration Problem

    - by Tanu Sood
    Phil Hunt is an active member of multiple industry standards groups and committees (see brief bio at the end of the post) and has spearheaded discussions, creation and ratifications of  Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE X-NONE MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii- mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast; mso-hansi- mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;} industry standards including the Kantara Identity Governance Framework, among others. Being an active voice in the industry standards development world, we have invited him to share his discussions, thoughts, news & updates, and discuss use cases, implementation success stories (and even failures) around industry standards on this monthly column. Author: Phil Hunt This afternoon, the OAuth Working Group will meet at IETF88 in Vancouver to discuss some important topics important to the maturation of OAuth. One of them is the OAuth client registration problem.OAuth (RFC6749) was initially developed with a simple deployment model where there is only monopoly or singleton cloud instance of a web API (e.g. there is one Facebook, one Google, on LinkedIn, and so on). When the API publisher and API deployer are the same monolithic entity, it easy for developers to contact the provider and register their app to obtain a client_id and credential.But what happens when the API is for an open source project where there may be 1000s of deployed copies of the API (e.g. such as wordpress). In these cases, the authors of the API are not the people running the API. In these scenarios, how does the developer obtain a client_id? An example of an "open deployed" API is OpenID Connect. Connect defines an OAuth protected resource API that can provide personal information about an authenticated user -- in effect creating a potentially common API for potential identity providers like Facebook, Google, Microsoft, Salesforce, or Oracle. In Oracle's case, Fusion applications will soon have RESTful APIs that are deployed in many different ways in many different environments. How will developers write apps that can work against an openly deployed API with whom the developer can have no prior relationship?At present, the OAuth Working Group has two proposals two consider: Dynamic RegistrationDynamic Registration was originally developed for OpenID Connect and UMA. It defines a RESTful API in which a prospective client application with no client_id creates a new client registration record with a service provider and is issued a client_id and credential along with a registration token that can be used to update registration over time.As proof of success, the OIDC community has done substantial implementation of this spec and feels committed to its use. Why not approve?Well, the answer is that some of us had some concerns, namely: Recognizing instances of software - dynamic registration treats all clients as unique. It has no defined way to recognize that multiple copies of the same client are being registered other then assuming if the registration parameters are similar it might be the same client. Versioning and Policy Approval of open APIs and clients - many service providers have to worry about change management. They expect to have approval cycles that approve versions of server and client software for use in their environment. In some cases approval might be wide open, but in many cases, approval might be down to the specific class of software and version. Registration updates - when does a client actually need to update its registration? Shouldn't it be never? Is there some characteristic of deployed code that would cause it to change? Options lead to complexity - because each client is treated as unique, it becomes unclear how the clients and servers will agree on what credentials forms are acceptable and what OAuth features are allowed and disallowed. Yet the reality is, developers will write their application to work in a limited number of ways. They can't implement all the permutations and combinations that potential service providers might choose. Stateful registration - if the primary motivation for registration is to obtain a client_id and credential, why can't this be done in a stateless fashion using assertions? Denial of service - With so much stateful registration and the need for multiple tokens to be issued, will this not lead to a denial of service attack / risk of resource depletion? At the very least, because of the information gathered, it would difficult for service providers to clean up "failed" registrations and determine active from inactive or false clients. There has yet to be much wide-scale "production" use of dynamic registration other than in small closed communities. Client Association A second proposal, Client Association, has been put forward by Tony Nadalin of Microsoft and myself. We took at look at existing use patterns to come up with a new proposal. At the Berlin meeting, we considered how WS-STS systems work. More recently, I took a review of how mobile messaging clients work. I looked at how Apple, Google, and Microsoft each handle registration with APNS, GCM, and WNS, and a similar pattern emerges. This pattern is to use an existing credential (mutual TLS auth), or client bearer assertion and swap for a device specific bearer assertion.In the client association proposal, the developer's registration with the API publisher is handled by having the developer register with an API publisher (as opposed to the party deploying the API) and obtaining a software "statement". Or, if there is no "publisher" that can sign a statement, the developer may include their own self-asserted software statement.A software statement is a special type of assertion that serves to lock application registration profile information in a signed assertion. The statement is included with the client application and can then be used by the client to swap for an instance specific client assertion as defined by section 4.2 of the OAuth Assertion draft and profiled in the Client Association draft. The software statement provides a way for service provider to recognize and configure policy to approve classes of software clients, and simplifies the actual registration to a simple assertion swap. Because the registration is an assertion swap, registration is no longer "stateful" - meaning the service provider does not need to store any information to support the client (unless it wants to). Has this been implemented yet? Not directly. We've only delivered draft 00 as an alternate way of solving the problem using well-known patterns whose security characteristics and scale characteristics are well understood. Dynamic Take II At roughly the same time that Client Association and Software Statement were published, the authors of Dynamic Registration published a "split" version of the Dynamic Registration (draft-richer-oauth-dyn-reg-core and draft-richer-oauth-dyn-reg-management). While some of the concerns above are addressed, some differences remain. Registration is now a simple POST request. However it defines a new method for issuing client tokens where as Client Association uses RFC6749's existing extension point. The concern here is whether future client access token formats would be addressed properly. Finally, Dyn-reg-core does not yet support software statements. Conclusion The WG has some interesting discussion to bring this back to a single set of specifications. Dynamic Registration has significant implementation, but Client Association could be a much improved way to simplify implementation of the overall OpenID Connect specification and improve adoption. In fairness, the existing editors have already come a long way. Yet there are those with significant investment in the current draft. There are many that have expressed they don't care. They just want a standard. There is lots of pressure on the working group to reach consensus quickly.And that folks is how the sausage is made.Note: John Bradley and Justin Richer recently published draft-bradley-stateless-oauth-client-00 which on first look are getting closer. Some of the details seem less well defined, but the same could be said of client-assoc and software-statement. I hope we can merge these specs this week. Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE X-NONE MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii- mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast; mso-hansi- mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;} About the Writer: Phil Hunt joined Oracle as part of the November 2005 acquisition of OctetString Inc. where he headed software development for what is now Oracle Virtual Directory. Since joining Oracle, Phil works as CMTS in the Identity Standards group at Oracle where he developed the Kantara Identity Governance Framework and provided significant input to JSR 351. Phil participates in several standards development organizations such as IETF and OASIS working on federation, authorization (OAuth), and provisioning (SCIM) standards.  Phil blogs at www.independentid.com and a Twitter handle of @independentid.

    Read the article

  • JSR Updates

    - by heathervc
    JSR 359, SIP Servlet 2.0, is a new JSR that has been submitted for JSR Review.  The review closes 16 July; the JSR Approval Ballot will be 17-20 July 2012. JSR 355, JCP Executive Committee Merge, has passed the Public Review Ballot and a Proposed Final Draft is now available for review. JSR 340, Java Servlet 3.1 Specification, has posted an Early Draft Review.  The review closes 1 August 2012.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >