No other way around the security policy?  Why can't it be firewall ruled?
 This seems impossible, or perhaps a bug, not sure.  Nearly every other
commercial firewall has this ability.


On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 10:22 AM, Ermal Luçi <[email protected]> wrote:

> Yeah expect that setkey used on pfsense is the one coming with ipsec-tools.
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 1:13 PM, Erik Friesen <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> I see they know.
>> http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=setkey&sektion=8
>>
>> No other alternatives to selectively route ports to an ipsec vpn?
>>
>> *BUGS <http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=setkey&sektion=8#end>*
>>
>>      The *setkey*    utility should report and handle syntax errors better.
>>
>>      For IPsec gateway configuration, *src**_**range*        and 
>> *dst**_**range* with TCP/UDP
>>      port number do not      work, as the gateway does not reassemble 
>> packets (can-
>>      not inspect upper-layer headers).
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 3:25 PM, Ermal Luçi <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> You need to tell even racoon about this.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 2:35 PM, Erik Friesen <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I have been trying to set up an ipsec vpn to only route from/to tcp
>>>> port 80 and 440.  The vpn sets up fine, but since there is no setting in
>>>> the gui for ports, I have taken to hand trying some different SPDs.
>>>>
>>>> From the command line:
>>>> setkey -FP  - erases current spd's
>>>> setkey -f filename - loads new file
>>>>
>>>> this is one I have tried -
>>>> spdadd -4 192.168.0.1/32 192.168.0.0/24 any -P out none;
>>>> spdadd -4 192.168.0.0/24 192.168.0.1/32 any -P in none;
>>>> spdadd -4 192.168.0.0/24[any] <http://192.168.0.0/24%5Bany%5D>
>>>> 0.0.0.0/0[80] <http://0.0.0.0/0%5B80%5D> tcp -P out ipsec
>>>> esp/tunnel/69.27.61.178-199.19.252.164/unique;
>>>> spdadd -4 0.0.0.0/0[any] <http://0.0.0.0/0%5Bany%5D> 
>>>> 192.168.0.0/24[80]<http://192.168.0.0/24%5B80%5D>tcp -P in ipsec 
>>>> esp/tunnel/199.19.252.164-69.27.61.178/unique;
>>>>
>>>> and many other combinations between the [].  However, a port number
>>>> seems to break it, where no traffic get routed to the ipsec interface.
>>>>
>>>> I know this would take a bit of coding to inhibit the auto update from
>>>> xml, but otherwise would this be doable if setkey/racoon?? would cooperate?
>>>>  Or are there other factors at play?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> List mailing list
>>>> [email protected]
>>>> http://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Ermal
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> List mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> http://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> List mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> List mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list
>
>
_______________________________________________
List mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list

Reply via email to