similar to: clarification on ipsec and masqing

Folk, My network is described and illustrated here. http://carnot.yi.org/NetworksPage.html To allow Cantor and Dalton, in the vpn zone connected to Joule through tun0, to SMTP to my ISP, I tried this in /etc/shorewall/masq. #INTERFACE SOURCE ADDRESS PROTO PORT(S) IPSEC MARK eth0 tun0 Shorewall complains. 07:21:58 Setting up Masquerading/SNAT... 07:21:58 To 0.0.0.0/0

Hi, I have setup a IPSEC VPN using Openswan to connect a Draytek router to a CentOS 5.2/Shorewall 4.2.9 firewall. The VPN establishes OK but I''m getting a problem with packets from the left hand subnet getting masqueraded rather than routed down the IPSEC VPN as though they were going out onto the net. I''ve spent the last day searching Google and so far I''ve hit a

I setup some IPSEC between 2 networks. From 1 network I can ping the other networks local connection but not anything beyond that. Network A - 10.0.1.1 (loc) 23.23.23.23 (net) Network B - 10.0.2.1 (loc) 44.44.44.44 (net) I''m on local machine 10.0.1.10 on network A, I can ping 10.0.2.1 but I cannot ping a machine on that network ex. 10.0.2.200. I was thinking it probally has to do

I''ve kept this one on the back burner for a while, waiting for it to mature before attempting to use it, and now having seen OpenBSD ship with IPSec I''m getting a bit impatient =). What is the status of IPSec for Linux (and more specifically RedHat)? By this I mean I just did some www browsing/etc and found about a half dozen different implimentations, ranging from NRL, to a

Hey First, apologies if this went out twice. I sent the original email from an odd email configuration (essentially from an alias of what I signed up as). I searched and noticed that my post did not appear and I did not get a bounce back so I was confused. I waited a few days before resending. So apologies if this goes out twice. I am not trying to spam. I was hoping someone could help me with

Dear list, I''m running Shorewall on a dedicated Fedora 7 box. Shorewall is working well as an office DSL router (dynamic IP) with loc and dmz zones. I am now trying to configure IPSec to connect a VPS, "casp", with a static IP to both the firewall and to the loc network behind it. The host to host SA works fine. However, pings from "loc" to "casp" can be

Hi, I''m trying to set-up an ipsec tunnel between a Redhat9 box and a Netgear FVS318. When trying to initialise the connection - ifup ipsec0 - I get the error: RTNETLINK answers: Network is unreachable This would lead me to believe shorewall is blocking ipsec. My config is below. The output of ''shorewall status'' is attached. Any help in pointing out if I''ve

Hello Mailinglist, please excuse my bad english - but I am not a native speaker. My Network looks like this: Internet --- dyn. IP --- Firewall (shorewall) --- LAN (192.168.X.X) No I try to connect my iphone (from mobile Internet G3) over VPN (l2tp/ipsec) with the firewall. But I can´t open the necessary Port 1701. /var/log/syslog ... Dec 30 00:24:29 router kernel: [226128.293757]

hello, my setup is rh8 2.4.20-8, shorewall 2.0.7, freeswan-2.04. ------- policy------- vpn loc accept loc vpn accept vpn fw accept fw vpn accept --------------------- --------zone ------- net net loc local dmz dmz vpn vpn ------------------------ ----- tunnels --------- ipsec net 0.0.0.0/0 vpn ipsecnat net 0.0.0.0/0 vpn -------------------------------------- ------ interfaces

I am wanting to verify that I am properly using the MASQ for a series of hosts. I have 2 providers, and my providers file has the contents: #NAME NUMBER MARK DUPLICATE INTERFACE GATEWAY OPTIONS COPY l3 1 100 main eth0.100 1.18.139.1 track,loose,fallback eth1 ws 2 200 main eth0.101 1.155.136.193

Hi! I''m testing IPSec tunnels, having the following test schemma: Host A - eth0: 192.168.1.67 eth1: 192.168.10.1 Host B - eth0: 192.168.1.254 eth1: 192.168.20.1 I''ve succesfully configured an IPSec tunnel in order to safely communicate from 192.168.10.0/24 (which is obviously behind Host A), and 192.168.20.0/24 (obviously behind Host B) In this test

> -----Original Message----- > From: Greg Panula [mailto:greg.panula@dolaninformation.com] > Sent: 12 May 2003 11:10 > To: Matthew Braithwaite > Cc: stable@freebsd.org > Subject: Re: iHEADS UP: ipsec packet filtering change > > You don't really need the gif tunnels for ipsec. Gif is more geared > towards ipv4 <=> ipv6 type tunnels. A few of ipsec

Hi, I have FreeBSD box with network interface having y.y.y.y ip address. On same box i configure next ipsec ploicys to process trafic from hardware ipsec enabled device. spdadd 0.0.0.0/0 x.x.x.x/24 any -P out ipsec esp/tunnel/y.y.y.y-z.z.z.z/require; spdadd x.x.x.x/24 0.0.0.0/0 any -P in ipsec esp/tunnel/z.z.z.z-y.y.y.y/require; Is it possible to see decrypted incoming packets, and outgoing

I have the task to make an IPsec tunnel between a Cisco router and a Linux router. The people that have set the Cisco router have sent me this (Cisco) config file, but that doesn''t help me a lot since I don''t understand nor ipsec nor Cisco syntax that well. So, can anyone help me to make the ipsec configuration? Second, what''s better to use ipsec-tools or isakmpd on

Hi, This issue might be a slightly offtopic, but someone might have experience with it. Thanks for reading this post anyway. I have the following setup: Network 10.227.7.X is connected over a wlan (172.1.1.1 <-> 172.1.1.2) to network 128.1.1.X. This setup works, I have cross-subnet browsing going and I am able to login. When I enable IPSEC (raccoon (linux <-> freebsd)) I am still

On Sun, 23 Feb 2003 09:47:05 -0800, "Sam Leffler" <sam@errno.com> said: > >> Add a new config option IPSEC_FILTERGIF to control whether or not >> packets coming out of a GIF tunnel are re-processed by ipfw, >> et. al. By default they are not reprocessed. With the option they >> are. > > This may affect your ipfw/ipf rules. If you are happy with

Hi, I am trying to setup ipsec tunnel between Freebsd (host1) and Linux (host2) systems.And I also interested in executing some ipsec test cases( Like TAHI conformance test suite) on the same connection. Please, suggest me some details regarding this setup and Specify any materials which can be obtained from from any locations(site).. I have enabled IPSec support for FreeBSD (4.11 Release) and

Hello, After I''ve switched from 2.1.6 to 2.1.11 I could not run Xserver (TCP 6000) over ipsec anymore, so I''ve reinstalled 2.1.6. Is it a bug or configuration issue? The error is: Shorewall:net2all:DROP: IN=eth0 OUT=eth1 MAC=00:50:da:2d:c1:6c:00:0c:31:f6:c4:8d:08:00 SRC=192.168.123.150 DST=192.168.1.2 LEN=48 TOS=00 PREC=0x00 TTL=62 ID=36507 CE PROTO=TCP SPT=35069 DPT=6000

While I have concentrated on support for 2.6 native IPSEC in release 2.2.0, I am still of the opinion that unless you absolutely need IPSEC compatibility that OpenVPN is a much easier (and in the case of roadwarriors, a much better) solution. Having already generated all of the required X.509 certificates, it took me less than 1/2 hr to replace my IPSEC testbed with an OpenVPN one using the new

Hi, Does anyone have experience using IPSEC on CentOS in order to connect to vendor IPSEC-based VPN products (specifically Checkpoint FW1) ? Is the included IPSEC implementation sufficient, or do people have to rely on OpenSWAN or FreeSWAN ? I'd be testing tomorrow and I'm interested with experiences others have had and things to look out for. Thanks in advance, -- dag wieers, dag