[pptp-server] PPTP masquerade && MS non-compliance

[Allan Clark]

OK, we've all seen the Microsoft Halloween papers... "enrich and
extend... to preserve our client base.." etc.  I think we can kill the
way this thread is going before we start.

We were back somewhere around "multiple connections between two boxes,
one of which is masquerading for the actual PPTP clients" -- and whether
this is a good thing for poptop and the masquerading folks to consider.

There's a heavy precident in the industry for "that's what the spec
says, but we're emulating the non-compliance of those guys".  I think we
should consider supporting this, **AND** draft an ammendment or revision
to the RFC.

Allan


Charlie Brady wrote:
> 
> On Fri, 22 Jun 2001, Jamin Collins wrote:
> 
> > It is rather funny to point out that Microsoft helped to draft this RFC and
> > yet they don't even abide by it in their own implimentation.
> 
> The same thing happened with DHCP. I don't recall anyone accusing
> Microsoft of being consistent, finnicky about standards, careful about
> reliability, careful about interoperability, etc.