Hi,
I've successfully set up the IPSec tunnel and the remote side can connect
to both our public ip. As a result, 4 SAs are being created.
Data is received on both inbound SAs, but I can only send packets
to one outbound SA, depending on which one is established first.
If I remove such SA via "ip
Hey,
to begin with, it would be nice to see output from ‘netstat -rn’ before
you started adding/deleting routes.
//mxb
> On 15 juni 2016, at 22:56, rizz2pro wrote:
>
> Hi, im not sure if this is some kind of bug or by design but I thought
> i would ask.
>
> Firstly check out this diagram I made
Hi, im not sure if this is some kind of bug or by design but I thought
i would ask.
Firstly check out this diagram I made: http://i.imgur.com/EUXqauH.png
- I hope im allowed to post that link.
The servers have default routes to their firewalls.
Firewall A has a default route to 10.100.100.2
Fire
i agree lets try again!
hi folks
> Date: Fri, 1 Jun 2012 10:55:09 -0700
> From: tyl...@tradetech.net
> To: genesi...@hotmail.com
> Subject: Re: ipsec routing dinamic ip over adsl
>
> On 5/31/2012 7:31 PM, carlos albino garcia grijalba wrote:
i have the following problem
remote
hi folksi have the following problemremote office connect to my vpn server in
order to connect to the internals over the ipsec tunnel the office has ip
phonesto connect to call manager over the 192.168.0.0/16 the ip phone
192.168.30.2/28 so the ip phone connect correct but thereis another ip client
Yes, my bad. I didn't include any other information because I didn't
think it could be version specific. We are using OpenBSD 3.8, and
OpenVPN 2.0.6 (from packages).
You are right about IPSec not routing. What I meant is how the
configured flows are being chosen/matched so that the OS routes the
p
You may want to include some more information, like what version of
OpenBSD your running, and one version of OpenVPN your running.
One thing you must remember is that IPSec does not route, packets must
match an IPSec profile and are then that packet is wraped up in an IPSec
header and sent acr
Hello misc!
We are experiencing what seems to be a routing problem when using ipsec
flows and udp traffic.
We are using OpenVPN for the employees to connect from the outside world
to our network. It is configured to use UDP. At the same time, this box
has an ipsec tunnel configured to talk betwee
On Mon, March 27, 2006 3:01 pm, Rod.. Whitworth wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Mar 2006 14:26:19 -0500 (EST), Nikolai N. Fetissov wrote:
>
>>On Sun, March 26, 2006 9:53 pm, Rod.. Whitworth wrote:
>>> 3.9 i386 build #617 snapshot:
>>>
>>> I have an ipsec.conf at one end of a tunnel-
>>> ike esp from 192.168.1.
On Mon, 27 Mar 2006 14:26:19 -0500 (EST), Nikolai N. Fetissov wrote:
>On Sun, March 26, 2006 9:53 pm, Rod.. Whitworth wrote:
>> 3.9 i386 build #617 snapshot:
>>
>> I have an ipsec.conf at one end of a tunnel-
>> ike esp from 192.168.1.0/24 to 192.168.0.0/24 peer 61.95.94.130
>> ike esp from 138.13
On Sun, March 26, 2006 9:53 pm, Rod.. Whitworth wrote:
> 3.9 i386 build #617 snapshot:
>
> I have an ipsec.conf at one end of a tunnel-
> ike esp from 192.168.1.0/24 to 192.168.0.0/24 peer 61.95.94.130
> ike esp from 138.130.27.231 to 192.168.0.0/24 peer 61.95.94.130
> ike esp from 138.130.27.231 t
3.9 i386 build #617 snapshot:
I have an ipsec.conf at one end of a tunnel-
ike esp from 192.168.1.0/24 to 192.168.0.0/24 peer 61.95.94.130
ike esp from 138.130.27.231 to 192.168.0.0/24 peer 61.95.94.130
ike esp from 138.130.27.231 to 61.95.94.130
One of the machines on 192.168.1.0/24 wants to con
> no, you just need a route to the destination, this is a known
a route to the destination of the tunnel...(that overlaps with the encap
route...)...
> but and there's no simple fix. however, just create a network
> route for the peer that points back to the sender. this way
...or a route to th
On Tue, Dec 06, 2005 at 12:14:20AM -0500, Brian A. Seklecki wrote:
> OpenBSD requires that gateway A and gateway B have a default route
> declared
no, you just need a route to the destination, this is a known
but and there's no simple fix. however, just create a network
route for the peer th
On 6 dec 2005, at 06.14, Brian A. Seklecki wrote:
OpenBSD requires that gateway A and gateway B have a default route
declared
*EVEN THOUGH ONE IS NOT REQUIRED IN THE LAB CONFIGURATION*
...
So why in the world would a default gateway be required? A default
gateway is only required to r
All:
I'm CC'ing everyone who has previously posted the "destination host
unreachable" behavior when setting up a generic 4-host IPSec VPN tunnel
config per the template in vpn(8) / isakmpd.conf(5).
NOTE: This is not the "I can't ping the other side of the tunnel from the
remote gateway becau
Christoph Leser wrote:
Hello,
the question is about how to route traffic from an openvpn tunnel
to an ipsec tunnel.
This is my setup:
The OpenBSD gateway has an internal (10.0.1.1/24 )
and external (x.x.x.x/30) interface.
The internal net is NAT'ed to the external interface to provide
int
On Tue, Nov 22, 2005 at 08:31:13PM +0100, Christoph Leser wrote:
> Hello,
>
> the question is about how to route traffic from an openvpn tunnel
> to an ipsec tunnel.
>
> This is my setup:
>
> The OpenBSD gateway has an internal (10.0.1.1/24 )
> and external (x.x.x.x/30) interface.
>
> The inte
Hello,
the question is about how to route traffic from an openvpn tunnel
to an ipsec tunnel.
This is my setup:
The OpenBSD gateway has an internal (10.0.1.1/24 )
and external (x.x.x.x/30) interface.
The internal net is NAT'ed to the external interface to provide
internet access to hosts on th
> --- Quoting [EMAIL PROTECTED] on 2005/08/25 at 01:20 +0200:
>
> (can you try wrap your lines at a reasonable 72 chars?)
Yup! Sorry..
>
> > No, the rl0 gateway (PC_B) is 192.168.3.254. Client1 is .3.70,
> > PC_B's internal network is, of course, 192.168.3.0/24.
>
> Oops, I should've
--- Quoting [EMAIL PROTECTED] on 2005/08/25 at 01:20 +0200:
(can you try wrap your lines at a reasonable 72 chars?)
> No, the rl0 gateway (PC_B) is 192.168.3.254. Client1 is .3.70, PC_B's
> internal network is, of course, 192.168.3.0/24.
Oops, I should've seen that 3.70 was an ARP entry. It'
> --- Quoting [EMAIL PROTECTED] on 2005/08/24 at 18:35 +0200:
> > 1) From Client1, I cannot ping its default gateway (.3.254) anymore. No
> > ping replies. ssh connection is frozen.
>
> What machine and interface is .3.254 on? From the information below it does
> not look like it's on PC_B.
--- Quoting [EMAIL PROTECTED] on 2005/08/24 at 18:35 +0200:
> 1) From Client1, I cannot ping its default gateway (.3.254) anymore. No ping
> replies. ssh connection is frozen.
What machine and interface is .3.254 on? From the information below it
does not look like it's on PC_B. PC_B is .3.70.
Hello!
I'm having troubles with IPsec, but I'm not really sure whether it's an
IPsec issue, a routing problem or just that I'm missing something big, very
big... So any help is more than welcome!
Here's the setup: PC_A is acting as a NAT gateway with three network cards.
sis0 goes to an
On Sat, 23 Jul 2005, Hans-Joerg Hoexer wrote:
Hi,
On Fri, Jul 22, 2005 at 06:43:34PM -0400, Brian A. Seklecki wrote:
The URL:
http://digitalfreaks.org/~lavalamp/openbsd_ipsec_generic.png
Outlines the generic cookie-cutter configuration from vpn(8) with
addressing changes. A couple of comme
The URL:
http://digitalfreaks.org/~lavalamp/openbsd_ipsec_generic.png
Outlines the generic cookie-cutter configuration from vpn(8) with
addressing changes. A couple of comments on that document:
*) The output of 'netstat -rn -f encap' should probably be included at the
end.
*) ...possibl
26 matches
Mail list logo
