similar to: multiple ipsec connection between two gateway

>sample setups of freeswan working with shorewall? I just implemented this a few days ago. In my case it was the simple scenario of two private subnets (with different private network numbers!) already equipped with Shorewall firewalls on which I added Freeswan. The hardest part was being patient enough for the other end''s firewall (a 486= ) to compile the patched kernel. I basically

I''m getting insane here. I''m running shorewall 1.3.11 with iptables 1.2.5 and freeswan 1.97 on a 2.4.18-8 kernel aka MNF. The setup is a followed: Lan (192.168.1.x) - FW (eth1 192.168.1.254 - eth0 64.x.y.71) - router 64.x.y.65 (which is default GW on eth0) -internet - 161.a.b.c (FW-1) So a windows client with checkpoint tries to connect to a vpn-1 server on the internet. The

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

hi, I can''t get a freeswan 2.02 ipsec x509 connection at work can somebody help me? ************************************************************************************* global situation ************************************************************************************* the linux gateway (chivas) is a single machine 192.168.1.250 with a local net 192.168.1.0/24, a dyn IP via a DSL

Helo to all, I am attempting to establish an IPSEC tunnel to a remote freeswan G/W with my laptop. My laptop sits in behind shorewall at home. From the documentation, this is what I Modified in Shorewall: /etc/shorewall/tunnels: ipsec loc 24.65.x.x /etc/shorewall/policy vpn loc ACCEPT loc vpn ACCEPT My question is, have I left anything out?

Shorewall version 2.0.3C Does anyone know where i might be able to get a RPM version of IPSEC for Linux Kernel -smp 2.4.20-31.9 ? I currently have IPSEC version 2.06 running on a Redhat Linux 9.0 box with kernel 2.4.20-6smp just fine. But whenever i attempt to upgrade the Kernel to the latest one mentioned above, IPSEC fails to startup properly and displays multiple error messages. I Checked

Hello Daniel, > If I can get this to work the next step would be to create a tunnel > between the linux box and the FW-1 server. (freeswan / ipsec) I think this would be easier than to tunnel ipsec through from a windows client behind your firewall. Add these config options to your ipsec.conf if you want to connect vom linux to checkpoint: keyingtries=0 pfs=no Currently I

Hello all, I am configuring a vpn between freeswan and windows 2000. I am following the steps at http://www.jacco2.dds.nl/networking/win2000xp-freeswan.html, to get the VPN up and running. using this I have a ppp tunnel between windows and linux, which is inside a l2tp tunnel which is again encrypted by IPSec. (the url gives the configuration in detail and I have followed it exactly) Now the

I am attempting to create an ipsec tunnel between two CentOS 5.1 systems, network-to-network with two different 192.168.xxx.0/24 LAN segments. I have gone through the documentation on the centos web site, and have the machines to the point where the /var/log/messages show ``IPsec-SA established'' on both machines after runnig ``ifup ipsec0'' (same ipsec0 on each machine). IP

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hello, I''m trying to setup a central IPSEC-Gateway with several ipsec tunnels. Some are to be routed over one leased line, some over the other leased line. Both leased lines have their own public ip adress. The setup looks kinda like this: eth1(ipsec0)--ISP0--Internet--eth1-Linux1-eth0--Subnet1 /

This one is a bit complex so if no help is forthcoming, I understand. I have 2 shorewall firewalls (1.3.13) up and running. (both machines running Gentoo Linux 1.4_rc2) I have freeswan (1.98) running on each of them. I have squid setup as a caching/filtering server on each of them. Each of them was originally setup using the Two-interface Quick Start Guide. Then the Squid guide and then the IPSEC

Hi , I have setup site-to-site IPSEC tunnel using Freeswan and Shorewall. I have 3 sites, One central site called site-A, and 2 remote sites called site-B and site-C. Now site-A can communicate with site-B and site-C repectively. I want to enable site-B talk to site-C using Tunnel hub configuration. I have enabled the shorewall policy on site-A server so that site-B can talk site-C, but it

Hi. I am trying to force some traffic that goes to address 203.7.93.94 through a VPN tunnel. I use freeswan 1.98b and Shorewall 1.4.6c in one machine. The 203.7.93.94 is in the DMZ on the other end. (Both ends use the same shorewall and freeswan). I have successfully set up a tunnel between the two network (using a point to point topology, not hub). I added a static routing that redirect

Hello, I seem to have the Freeswan IPSEC tunnel working between my two sites, but I am still having a problem that looks to be because of something I have configured wrong in my shorewall setup.. I have a LEAF Oxygen < 1.9 heavily modifed firewall setup.. Using FreeSwan 1.91, and Kernel 2.4.8. Modified to use IPTables and standard Debian network/interfaces. I am also using Shorewall

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

I am have a shorewall firewall and freeswan ipsec running on a redhat 8.0 Linux gateway machine. I have one working tunnel defined, all works well. I am not clear how to define mutiple concurrent tunnels. I can not add further interface entries as all the tunnels come in on ipsec0, do I still have mutiple zone definitions? some of the tunnels will be dynamic roadwarriors and as such would need a

Actually - as I stated - I have cross subnet browsing working (and thus wins). And I do have a samba box on both ends. The behaviour I noted happens irregularly: sometimes I can open a share on the other subnet, but mostly I cannot not. I'll still have a look at your suggestions though, it might help. Regards, Bolke > I suspect your problem is, netbios *broadcasts* simply don't

Sorry Dag, it is possible to use linux as a roadwarrior client: http://www.fw-1.de/aerasec/ng/vpn-racoon/CP-VPN1-NG-Linux-racoon-roadwarrior.html -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [CentOS] Connecting CentOS to IPSEC VPN (Checkpoint FW1) Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 15:20:55 +0200 From: carlopmart <carlopmart at gmail.com> To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org>

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+

To all, I''ve just recently finished my "Security Gateway Server" project which separates a 10 laptop WLAN subnet from our main LAN/Internet network. I used Debian Sarge with kernel 2.6.9/ipsec-netfilter patched, and Shorewall 2.2.0-RC3 on a Asus P4S533, 2.4 GHz PenIV and 512MB memory. The Toshiba A60-S166, PenIV, 2.4G laptops run Windows XP Pro and have internal Atheros based