similar to: 2.6 kernel ipsec and shorewall

Displaying 20 results from an estimated 1000 matches similar to: "2.6 kernel ipsec and shorewall"

2004 Sep 23
0
Fwd: RE: 2.6 kernel ipsec and shorewall
FYI... ---------- Forwarded Message ---------- Subject: RE: [Shorewall-users] 2.6 kernel ipsec and shorewall Date: Thursday 23 September 2004 07:44 From: "Jonathan Schneider" <jon@clearconcepts.ca> To: "''Tom Eastep''" <teastep@shorewall.net> I must have been up too late working on this, looking at it the next day I noticed I completely forgot
2013 Apr 11
2
IKEv2/IPSEC "Road Warrior" VPN Tunneling?
Is there a "cookbook" for setting this up? There are examples for setting up a tunnel between two fixed-address networks (e.g. a remote LAN that needs to be "integrated" with a central LAN over IPSec but I can't find anything addressing the other situation -- remote user(s) where the connecting IPs are not known in advance, such as a person with a laptop or smartphone in a
2008 Jul 07
5
IPSEC tunnel up, but no traffic coming through
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
2007 May 04
1
Multiple SA in the same IPSec tunnel
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
2007 Oct 12
1
OT: a very big problem with ipsec-tools on CentOS5 (SOLVED)
Buf ... Solved. Problem was that /etc/pam.d/racoon doesn't exists (I found this tip on NetBSD ipsec pages). Simply I have copied /etc/pam.d/passwd to /etc/pam.d/racoon and now all works as expected. Many thanks for your help Ross. Ross S. W. Walker wrote: > > I think it might just use another one like /etc/pam.d/remote > cause I audited the package and it wasn't there.
2004 Dec 10
2
Shorewall and IPSEC
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
2003 Aug 07
1
IPSec delays
I've been using IPSec and racoon alot lately creating tunnels between FreeBSD machines. Everything works as it should once I've got it running. I do however seem to get delays when one, or both ends of the tunnel drop or are rebooted. On reboot, once the machine starts racoon, it takes two or three minutes for the tunnel to come back up. If I stop and restart racoon, it takes only 60
2007 Sep 03
3
Shorewall + IPSec: help debugging why gw1<->gw2 SA works, but loc<->gw2 traffic doesn't trigger SA
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
2004 Jan 13
3
IPSEC btwn stable and Linksys BEFVP41 stopped working.
Hi, I have been using IPsec to communicate between a laptop that tracks -stable and a Linksys BEFVP41 router. I only use it infrequently, but it's been working great. My setup is as described in http://grapeape.alerce.com/linksys-ipsec/article.html (which I am planning to submit to the handbook when it's done). I'm no longer able to make an ipsec connection, and I can't put my
2004 Oct 06
7
Re: IPsec problems with tunneled networks
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
2004 Oct 06
7
Re: IPsec problems with tunneled networks
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
2016 Mar 21
2
IPSec multiple VPN setups
Hi I hope someone can answer something I'm sure is quite basic. I am following the instructions at https://www.centos.org/docs/5/html/Deployment_Guide-en-US/ch-vpn.html On setting up a VPN The part I am having trouble with is when it show the /etc/racoon/racoon.conf file. But it doesn't say whay you have to do with this file. When I bring up my connection ifup bicester I get RTNETLINK
2004 Apr 27
2
IPsec works, but racoon/IKE does not
I have no idea whatsoever as to why racoon/IKE does not work here. I've tried various how-to documents but found nothing that works for me. Gateway (10.0.0.1) running 4.9-stable. Laptop (10.0.0.10) running 5.2.1-release. Both running racoon-20040408a On the gateway 10.0.0.1 # cat /etc/ipsec.conf add 10.0.0.1 10.0.0.10 esp 691 -E rijndael-cbc "1234567890123456" -A hmac-sha1
2016 Mar 21
3
IPSec multiple VPN setups
Centos 5 is still soon end of life. Using it as ipsec gateway is .. Eero 21.3.2016 7.25 ip. "Mike - st257" <silvertip257 at gmail.com> kirjoitti: > On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 1:17 PM, Mike - st257 <silvertip257 at gmail.com> > wrote: > > > I second Eero's comment, use a new IPSec daemon. > > > > Openswan was forked and became Libreswan. Paul, now
2016 Mar 21
5
IPSec multiple VPN setups
I second Eero's comment, use a new IPSec daemon. Openswan was forked and became Libreswan. Paul, now a RH employee, was a main developer for the Openswan project before he and others created the Libreswan fork. https://libreswan.org/ EL6 has Openswan EL7 has Libreswan Racoon isn't all that fun to work with. If you have the option, ditch it and EL5 and move to a newer platform
2016 Mar 21
2
IPSec multiple VPN setups
Err. Sounds like security nightmare. 21.3.2016 7.47 ip. "Glenn Pierce" <glennpierce at gmail.com> kirjoitti: > Will ask my boss :) We are hosted on memset so not so easy to update > > Thanks > > On 21 March 2016 at 17:36, Eero Volotinen <eero.volotinen at iki.fi> wrote: > > Centos 5 is still soon end of life. Using it as ipsec gateway is .. > >
2005 Dec 07
1
racoon with freebsd-4.11 crashes
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
2004 Oct 14
2
ipsec - report of success
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 claas@rootdir.de wrote: > I am using kernel 2.6.6 native ipsec with racoon and shorewall 2.1.9 > in production for one week now. I just want to tell you that it seems > to run stable here. > > I am going to extend my setup to a 3 gateway setup soon. > Afterwards I will try to also get roadwarriors in. > I will report on that
2010 Sep 08
3
IPSec on asterisk
Hi, I am trying to configure ipsec on asterisk. Have configured /etc/racoon/racoon.conf and /etc/raccoon/psk.txt. Also have policy file in same folder. Have run racoon. Still I can't receive calls. Can anyone please tell if any extra step is needed. Thanks -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:
2004 Sep 24
2
strange behavior of ipsec tunnel mode
hello i am trying to set up ipsec in my network, for now just between two hosts, using to use AH & ESP in tunnel mode to get all of packet encrypted. keys are negotiated with racoon. mayby using tunnel mode in this case can seems strange, but i know what i am doing. after setting up everything i have done few tests with ping & tcpdump. but the results are very suprising. bellow is what i