Re[2]: IPSec vs. NAT vs. Route

DS> Very true...but my goal is to have the windows users on the two 192.168.*
DS> networks to be able to 'play together' (ie. file transfer/printers/etc).
DS> Which leads me to the NAT and/or Routing questions..it's how to get the
DS> other computers on those networks to talk 'through' the IPSec machine (which
DS> are NOT currently the gateways)

if the IPSec gateways are NOT the default gateways, you must put a
static   route  on every machine who wants to talk to that special
network on the other side, which points to the ipsec-gateway.

the  easiest and best way  would  be  of  course if they
were the default gw...

A good idea if you want windows boxes to "play together" is to use
wins (windows naming service) samba can do this too.