similar to: SNAT on IPSEC tunnel with kernel 2.6/KAME tools?

Hi everyone, First of all, this is my first post in this ML, so I''m not sure that this is the right place for my question (please don''t shoot me down ;)). For the record, I''ve been reading and using LARTC for almost 3 years now, and it''s a great help for anyone who wants to learn linux networking. My problem: I want to setup a tunnel for the following

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

Hi, When a IPSec tunnel is established between two peers, I understand that the "normal" situation is to have in a given moment two SAs, one for each direction of the tunnel. However, in one of my tunnels (peer P1 running GNU/Linux with setkey and racoon; peer P2 is a Cisco router) there is a large number (around 19) of SAs established (this has been observed in P1 with

Tuomo Soini wrote: > You don''t happen to read shorewall-devel mailinglist ? I read it -- I just didn''t know what to make of your post and it arrived while I was on vacation. What exactly are you trying to accomplish that Shorewall isn''t doing for you now? e.g. /etc/shorewall/zones rw Roadwarriors Road Warriors /etc/shorewall/interfraces rw ipsec+

Hi all, I finally got my IPSec tunnel from my Fedora firewall system (running Shorewall 4.0.6) to a remote Draytek Router up-and-running, but I''m having difficulties directing traffic through the tunnel. From the output of "racoon -F -f racoon.conf" and the connection status page of the Draytek I can tell the tunnel is UP, but ping and traceroute requests to several hosts

FYI, looks like support for Racoon is ending. Does anyone have any experience with the version in ipsec-tools ? ---Mike >Racoon users, > >This is the announcement that the kame project will quit providing >a key management daemon, the racoon, and that "ipsec-tools" will become >the formal team to release the racoon. >The final release of the racoon in the

Hi, I have tried to enable IPSec support for my FreeBSD( 4.11-RELEASE) system. First, I copied the generic kernel configuration file to a file I called MYKERNEL: #cp /usr/src/sys/i386/conf/GENERIC /usr/src/sys/i386/conf/MYKERNEL Then, I added the following three lines to the options section of /usr/src/sys/i386/conf/MYKERNEL: options IPSEC options IPSEC_ESP options

Hello, I use Julian Anastasov ''routes'' (to be more specific: static_routes, alt_routes and nf_reroute) patches on a 2.4.32 kernel. On the same host I run IPSec. I have discovered after a few hours of networking problems that, when IPSec is enabled on that patched kernel, inspecting packets with tcpdump while arping-ing a host from a network physically connected to this

The second Beta is now available at: http://www.shorewall.net/pub/shorewall/Beta ftp://ftp.shorewall.net/pub/shorewall/Beta Function from 1.3 that has been omitted from this version includes: 1) The ''check'' command is no longer supported. 2) The MERGE_HOSTS variable in shorewall.conf is no longer supported. Shorewall 1.4 behavior is the same as 1.3 with MERGE_HOSTS=Yes.

Hi Running racoon on a Freebsd-4.11 machine gives a kernel panic. I am using the racoon from ports directory which comes with the freebsd installation. Steps followed are as shown below: racoon -f /usr/local/etc/racoon/raccon.conf setkey -f ipsec.conf ping -c 1 <ip_of_the_other_gw> The ping will lead into a crash. The crash dump looks like for th ping packet it

> -----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

Hello everyone, I''m not sure whether to place my question here or in the racoon mailing list or even in that of iptables. I have created an ipsec connection with racoon in tunnel mode to another gateway to connect one subnet on each side to each other. This works fine. Only the ipsec gateway itself can''t send packages to the opposite subnet. Shorewall is configured according

class wrote on 06/10/2004 11:18:48: > Hello, I have the following situation: > > 192.168.176.0/24 ------ A ========== B ------ 192.168.177.0/24 > 192.168.176.2 pop3 ipsec > racoon > > > policy: (Machine A and B) > ------- > loc vpn ACCEPT > vpn loc ACCEPT > all

class wrote on 06/10/2004 11:18:48: > Hello, I have the following situation: > > 192.168.176.0/24 ------ A ========== B ------ 192.168.177.0/24 > 192.168.176.2 pop3 ipsec > racoon > > > policy: (Machine A and B) > ------- > loc vpn ACCEPT > vpn loc ACCEPT > all

Hello! I am using shorewall shorewall-2.0.11-1 on fedora core2 (iptables-1.2.9-95.7). My box has 2 physical nic´s plus one virt. ipsec interface for a freeswan-vpn connection. A few days ago, portsentry spit out a lot of connections from windows clients (port 135, 445). Ooops. I review my shorewall settings but could not find a mistake. So I took a win-client and established a second

Scenario: FreeBSD box running IPFW acting as a gateway to private network. The private network is made up of entirely routeable IP addresses. External users running Win2k and XP on DSL connections with dynamic IPs. Goal: To have the FreeBSD gateway securely authenticate and encrypt the traffic between the outside users and the internal network. I've spent the last 3 days running up and

I set up an ipsec/racoon vpn tunnel test environment. The gateway machines are 192.168.0.30 and 192.168.0.31 on the external adaptor and 10.0.1.1 and 10.0.2.1 internally. The test workstations are 10.0.1.10 and 10.0.2.10. The tunnel seems to be working as in 10.0.1.10 can talk to 10.0.2.10 an vice versa and they can both use the net via NAT, however 192.168.0.30 and 192.168.0.31 cannot directly

I am trying to get a tunnel from a cisco 1760 with IOS 12.2.15.t13 to a freebsd 4.9 install with racoon. I have package version freebsd-20040408a and internal version 20001216 in my log file. I posted the full racoon and cisco log below my configs. Racoon keeps saying: 2004-07-26 16:24:03: DEBUG: isakmp.c:2295:isakmp_printpacket(): begin. 2004-07-26 16:24:03: DEBUG:

We had a running ipsec shorewall system to all of our remote offices. We added a dmz to the firewall and implemented proxy arp for that dmz. We have checked everything two or three times and cannot figure out why the vpns will no longer come up. We are using shorewall version 2.2.3 from the debian stable sarge distribution. We noticed the errata that for 2.0.0 there was a problem with proxy

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