similar to: ipsec tunnel to netgear fvs318

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

Hi, Could not conceive an working set-up for an IPSEC VPN made with racoon/setkey on which I have one address on my side acting as an SNAT router for all traffic from my network to a network segment on the far side. my network --- my gateway ---------------------- remote network 10.0.0.0/24 - 10.0.0.1 (10.253.0.2) -- tunnel - 192.168.0.0/22 All traffic starts on my side, so if I can

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

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, been awhile since I''ve written. I now have a situation where I get to use traffic shaping for a client. ~ We implemented the WonderShaper script on our own firewall and experienced no problems. I made some modifications to it to add IPSec protocol packets into the 1:10 high priority class using the u32 filter. ~ So far on our

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

Hello, it looks like the usual way to do ipsec on centos5 won't work anymore on centos6 I installed ipsec-tools but an interface type IPsec is not recognized by the kernel ifup ipsec0 Device does not seem to be present, delaying initialization. I am not planning to use the awful OpenSwan, I Want to sue the Kame implementation which was working fine on CentOS5 any hints ? thank you

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, 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

Dear list, I am having a problem with openvpn. I have the following arrangement, running two instances of openvpn on "home fw". I want to protect my WLAN in back of the home fw and that works fine. I can see "Peer connection initiated with 192.168.1.3:5000" in daemon.log on homefw. Nothing gets initiated with officefw, nor can I ping the other end of the tunnel at officefw.

Hi, still trying to understand one thing. I would definitely like to tell iptables to accept all packets coming from remote vpn only if they hit the $VIRTUALVPNINTERFACE. I tried -o ipsec0 but this is not working, looks like ipsec0 device doesn't exist or it is not recognized. I red on the Openswan users list, that Linux kernel 2.6 native ipsec don't create ipsec* interface (if I am

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

Hello all, I am working with kernel 2.2.20 with the necessary options configured into the kernel to support all of the wonderfully fancy routing features: - routing based on ToS - routing based on fwmark - multiple routing tables This same kernel is in use elsewhere, and is routing based on fwmark with success. This leads me to believe that my kernel is OK and that I have another

I noticed the long standing Ipsec FSwan problem was fixed. But do you still have to make sure Ipec is not running when shorewall starts Reason I ask Is I could not get my Dmz working with Ipsec in the equation. Thanks Mike

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

I am new to Shorewall and FreeSwan, please excuse my ignorance I was wondering if someone could help me. I had help getting my FreeSwan running with the following iptables commands: iptables -I FORWARD -s 0/0 -d 192.168.1.0/24 -i ipsec0 -o eth1 -j ACCEPT iptables -I FORWARD -s 192.168.1.0/24 -d 0/0 -i eth1 -o ipsec0 -j ACCEPT If I manually run this FreeSwan works, however I am not sure

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 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

Hi list, I am trying to create a VPN between two different locations. On the first location we have a cisco pix 525 Natting the internal 192.168.100.x network, while on the second location we have a Centos3 box Natting via iptables the internal 192.168.10.x netowrk. My goal is to connect this 2 over the internet via IPsec. I created the IPsec Net2Net via the network configuration graphic

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