On 18/11/11 18:28, Vic wrote:
> NAT-T is considered a security risk, and is disabled by default. It's best
> that it remain so.
>
Agreed... pity in my case both devices were behind NAT firewalls...
The situation is, apparently, rare and we evaluated the options and
decided it was probably best to make the needed registry change on
Windows clients to make it work, rather than fight with our ISP to get
proper (sane) addresses (our public IPs come from the 10.x.y.z pool).
Chris
--
Please post to: Hampshire@???
Web Interface:
https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/hampshire
LUG URL:
http://www.hantslug.org.uk
--------------------------------------------------------------
