similar to: Dynamic Zones

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, Problem: I want 2 vpn tunnels for 2 subnets over one interface ipsec0. Documentation only describes config for 1 vpn or road warriors. I defined 2 vpn zones ''fre'' and ''swe''. #ZONE DISPLAY COMMENTS net Net Internet zone loc Local Local fre VPN_Fre VPN Fre swe VPN_Swe VPN Swe Interface ipsec0 is tunnel over eth1. Local is eth0. ipsec0 serves 2 zones: fre

Hi, I had a look at this page which describes a single VPN zone called "vpn": http://www.shorewall.net/IPSEC-2.6.html Is this the most current information? It is the top page found by Google for "shorewall ipsec" Is there any information about setting up multiple VPN zones for different classes of road warrior? E.g. lets say there are two classes of road warrior:

I have a plan to make freeswan and shorewall talk to each other. Shorewall doesn''t currently have proper handles to make ipsec and firewall work properly together and I''m planning on building a custom _updown script for freeswan to make it communicate with shorewall. How can I make shorewall work properly with different road warriors with different dynamic ip-addresses and

[ sorry for cross-posting this to newbies and users, but I''m a bit desperate to get this resolved ] This is strange... I had this working before without any problems, and recently we started to have some odd issues. I can''t be sure exactly what has changed as I''m unfortunately not the only person with access to the server. {sigh} The problem is that I pretty much

Hi all, I''ve been using Shorewall 1.42 for a month on two firewalls at work and my own personal colocated server and love it. While pretty familiar with iptables, I don''t like dealing with it on a daily basis, and Shorewall certainly makes life easier. I''ve deployed Shorewall on both our Toronto and Ottawa office firewalls, and have configured a FreeS/WAN IPSEC

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

Change the assembly code to use only relative references of symbols for the kernel to be PIE compatible. Position Independent Executable (PIE) support will allow to extended the KASLR randomization range below the -2G memory limit. Signed-off-by: Thomas Garnier <thgarnie at google.com> --- arch/x86/crypto/aes-x86_64-asm_64.S | 45 ++++++++----- arch/x86/crypto/aesni-intel_asm.S

Hi there, I am plotting relative warp scores (equivalent to pca scores) and I want to label (color code and shape) the points by group. I can't figure out how to do this beyond simple plotting. plot(RW1, RW2); Do I need to make vectors of each group and then plot them separately onto the same plot? How do I go about this? Thanks! -- View this message in context:

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 In this release: 1) Dynamic Ipsec Zones now work. 2) Output Traffic Accounting by user/group is supported (thanks to Tuomas Jormola). 3) The following negative test options are added in /etc/shorewall/ipsec and /etc/shorewall/masq: reqid!=<number> spi!=<number> proto!=esp|ah|ipcomp mode!=tunnel|transport

I just got the list confirmation and noticed it''s text only email so here it is again in plain text. Below is the oringal message. Hi all, I am really struggling with this one, I have built a lot of linux machines using IPSEC tunnels and shorewall gateways. I decied to build a new test machine with Debian running 2.4.25 and Shorewall 2.0.15. I have two subnets on their own switches and

There''s a lot new in 1.3.10: 1) You may now define the contents of a zone dynamically with the "shorewall add" and "shorewall delete" commands. These commands are expected to be used primarily within FreeS/Wan updown scripts. 2) Shorewall can now do MAC verification on ethernet segments. You can specify the set of allowed MAC addresses on the segment and you can

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

In this version: 1) You may now define the contents of a zone dynamically with the "shorewall add" and "shorewall delete" commands. These commands are expected to be used primarily within FreeS/Wan updown scripts. 2) Shorewall can now do MAC verification on ethernet segments. You can specify the set of allowed MAC addresses on the segment and you can optionally

In this version: 1) You may now define the contents of a zone dynamically with the "shorewall add" and "shorewall delete" commands. These commands are expected to be used primarily within FreeS/Wan updown scripts. 2) Shorewall can now do MAC verification on ethernet segments. You can specify the set of allowed MAC addresses on the segment and you can optionally

-----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 /

Hello Gurus, I am a small problem with routing and here are the details. Interfaces on my server: * ipsec0 - 172.19.58.94 * tunl0 - 172.19.58.94 * eth0 - 172.19.58.94 Now, the problem is that there is another host 172.19.58.200. All communication to 172.19.58.200 should be through tunl0, and all the data should be secured using IPSec (tunnel mode - because there are more machines on my

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

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

Hi All, I just added a second subnet and thought I had read all the relevant FAQ''s and had set things up properly, but a few odd things are happening. ZONES: net Net Internet loc Local Local networks 192.168 loc2 Local Local networks 10.151 ppp PPP PPP Dial-in rw RoadWarriors Road Warriors rw2 RoadWarriors Road