similar to: Forward some traffic to VPN

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 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

Hi all! I have got a vpn connection set up using FreeSwan and shorewall. Everything works fine but I want to add another subnet to the whole. This means that 1 box will get two net-to-net connections. I want to limit the services on one subnet however. Cuurently I have defined a vpn zone for the current connection and allow all vpn<->loc traffic. How would I go about in tightening the

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

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 everyone. I am so baffled by the following problem: Office 1 is using ADSL and it is building a VPN tunnel with IPSEC to Office 2. Both ends are using shorewall/freeswan firewalls. Diagram: Office1 fw --- VPN TUNNEL --- Office2 fw --- cisco router ----- VLANS | DMZ Office 1 has the following interfaces: 2: eth0:

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, 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 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

I have been using shorewall and freeswan successfully for 3 or more years now. But they have all been using the Linux 2.4 kernel. My current configuration is (as the title suggests) using SuSE 9.1 which has a 2.6.5 kernel and freeswan 2.0.4 built-in. After much reading and a lot of trial and error, I did get this combination to work with Shorewall 2.0.9. It is happily talking to an older Mandrake

-----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 /

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

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

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

Dear shorewall users: I am going to implement VPN IPSEC pass through. Got shorewall as the main firewall interfacing the internet. I found Tom''s documentation on how to do it. The question is: there''s an argument that VPN pass through (pass through NAT) will undermine the importance of AH (source: freeswan site). Is it true? ------------------------ Lito Kusnadi

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

IF you are not stuck to IPSec, you might want to take a look at OpenVPN (www.openvpn.org). I found OpenVPN easier to install than FreeSWAN (an IPSEC VPN) and have setup an OpenVPN solution between my German office and our mainoffice in a matter of hours. Thom van der Boon E-Mail: Thom.van.der.Boon at vdb.nl ===== Thom.H. van der Boon b.v. Havens 563 Jan Evertsenweg 2-4 NL-3115 JA Schiedam

I have just setup a VPN connection three sites using IPCOP. Everything seems to be talking ok, apart from browsing the network neighborhood. There are no NT/Win2K/XP servers running on any of the sites, all sites are just running win98 pc's using tcp/ip. I have tried configuring all PC's to be on the same workgroup and setup sharing, but still each site can only see the pc's

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

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