similar to: Authenticates on lan but not through VPN

Hi, thanks for a great piece of software! ...at the moment I have a commercial VPN box, which also acts as our firewall. I wish to replace this firewall functionality with a decicated Shorewall firewall, and use the VPN box only for VPN traffic. At the moment, this VPN/Firewall box is at an internet visible address, x.x.x.85 I wish to make the new Shorewall fireall x.x.x.85 and move the VPN to

On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 05:29:16PM -0500, md at rpzdesign.com wrote: > I guess my primary point of confusion is that the non-vpn LAN ip > addresses are duplicated in each cluster. So within a cluster, the LAN > addresses are unique. > > But when you look at 2 clusters, 2 different servers share the > 10.99.0.11 address. That should not be a problem for tinc. As long as both

There is router/vpn server at Ubuntu 12.04 LTS with 2 static NICs - Lan (local area network) , and Wan (wide area network) . Also pptpd/xl2tp, iptables is installed at router. Forwarding, proxyarp and broadcast relay is set up at router. Samba4 4.1.x is installed at router. There is no any Wins in Lan. So, there are Ran (remote access network, that is Vpn) clients (client-to-server) being conneted

Gus: I guess my primary point of confusion is that the non-vpn LAN ip addresses are duplicated in each cluster. So within a cluster, the LAN addresses are unique. But when you look at 2 clusters, 2 different servers share the 10.99.0.11 address. So that is why I created a VPN for inside the cluster on the LAN interfaces using the private 10.0.1.xx range. THen, I created a separate VPN on the

Guus: Ok, I accept your challenge. But I am clueless in terms of getting the routing table correct. So each server has a dual identity, both a LAN private identity with a PRIVATE IP address and a WAN public identify with a PUBLIC ip address. And how to have 2 different tun devices show up in the ifconfig -a so that LAN IP address can be assigned to the tun0 and a WAN IP address can be assigned

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Guus: Thanks for the reply. Did you like the PDF examples? Do you want to help me build more examples for the web site so people can download the PDF network diagrams and have sample config files to match them? What changes should I make to allow for easier setup/config/config files of the 2 use cases? For the production example, would it be

Hello, First let me apologize for posting about a GUI topic on here. There's a reason why I did that, and it's because the underlying concept of this is connected to Asterisk.Here's my situation: Twenty wifi clients connecting to our wireless router (Cisco Linksys E4200 loaded with Tomato). All these WiFi clients are running eyeBeam (in case you're wondering where the calls come

Could you elaborate on why CLI (SSH) managing is insecure? Tomasz Chmielewski https://lxadm.com On 2018-03-27 04:23, al so wrote: > So, for remote manageability of Tinc, we don't have any SNMP or REST > like programmatic ways? > > If it is going to be CLI only, it is definitely not secure to manage > and also not very convenient to manage programmatically. > > On

On Friday, 29 Jul 2005, Brian Daniels wrote under [Samba] Samba, VPN, and Mac OSX 10.4.2: > After upgrading to Tiger, [our Mac OS X systems] still work fine > when on our LAN. But if they try to connect to a [Samba 3.0.10-1] > share over the [IPsec] VPN, Finder hangs. The Mac logs the > following messages in /var/log/system.log during the hang: > > Jul 29 09:59:46

On Mon, Dec 08, 2014 at 11:02:24PM -0500, md at rpzdesign.com wrote: > The self contained example is tricky because I created 4 ip-address on > the eth0 device (192.168.1.30/31/32/33) so I could test a 4 node VPN > that lives entirely within a single server. That's quite hard to do, it's far easier to run four instances of tinc on four different ports on the same machine. >

automation refers to day to day vpn management from non-IT layman... not a geek running shell/ansible scrpits. On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 8:48 AM, al so <volkswak at gmail.com> wrote: > Just search online why in general that is insecure via CLI vs programmatic > for first class automation.. there is a reason why snmp, rest, ... exist. > > On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 3:50 AM, Tomasz

SNMP is mainly used for monitoring, not _server_ automation. Also, it's inherently insecure for anything else - only SNMPv3 offers any kind of encryption, and it's DES - 56 bit only, and you can easily brute-force it on an average computer. If you could provide some serious articles about why is CLI insecure, I'd be interested to read. Tomasz Chmielewski https://lxadm.com On

On Sat, Mar 24, 2018 at 02:16:20PM -0700, al so wrote: > > Is there any quickstart guide to setup site-to-site VPN using Tinc 1.1 > > pre-rel? You can find an example of a site-to-site VPN with four sites here: http://tinc-vpn.org/documentation/Example-configuration.html > > Assuming I have two routers at two sites running tinc vpn along with > > routing feature. If

You've mentioned security issues in your previous email, but now you're hopping to management issues. Have you tried Ansible, Chef or Puppet for automation? It works well for hundreds of servers, different services and not just one kind of VPN. Tomasz Chmielewski https://lxadm.com On 2018-03-29 16:10, al so wrote: > Programmatic management with first class APIs is preferred for

Hello everyone, I am trying to find out if the following is possible: I a HOME domain setup at home running on samba. I also have a WORK domain setup at work. Both of these domains are using remote profiles. Since I recently added VPN support to the server at work, I want to explore the possibility of checking of the "use dialup connection" in my Win2K login screen and login using

Programmatic management with first class APIs is preferred for larger deployments.. On Mon, Mar 26, 2018 at 12:28 PM, Tomasz Chmielewski <mangoo at wpkg.org> wrote: > Could you elaborate on why CLI (SSH) managing is insecure? > > > Tomasz Chmielewski > https://lxadm.com > > > On 2018-03-27 04:23, al so wrote: > >> So, for remote manageability of Tinc, we

Hi, My problem is about DNS names resolution in case there are two DNS servers separated by a VPN and one DNS domain name. Context: two Samba AD DC on each side of the VPN, one forest, one domain, one site, two subnets. Note that this target configuration is not yet operational since I'm trying to make the DSN names resolution work first through the VPN. The DNS servers are Samba internal

So, for remote manageability of Tinc, we don't have any SNMP or REST like programmatic ways? If it is going to be CLI only, it is definitely not secure to manage and also not very convenient to manage programmatically. On Sun, Mar 25, 2018 at 1:44 AM, Guus Sliepen <guus at tinc-vpn.org> wrote: > On Sat, Mar 24, 2018 at 02:16:20PM -0700, al so wrote: > > > > Is there

Hi! I'm experiencing some serious problems setting up Samba as PDC. File sharing works fine and I can even add my computer to the domain, but when I reboot I can't log in with my samba username and password. I've previously set up similiar server, though it wasn't trough VPN. I'm running latest Debian Etch with every package upgraded. I've also tried some older samba

Hi, I've an up and running tinc vpn between my laptop and my office computer (on which I've root access if needs be). From where I'm sitting right now, UDP packets are dropped. TcpOnly has solved the problem for the tinc part and I can still connect to my office. I'd like to access some important <cough>irc</cough> UDP-only services. Do I have a