Re: *STUPID* IPSEC Routing Bug - No Default Gateway?!

2005-12-06 Thread HÃ¥kan Olsson
On 6 dec 2005, at 06.14, Brian A. Seklecki wrote: OpenBSD requires that gateway A and gateway B have a default route declared *EVEN THOUGH ONE IS NOT REQUIRED IN THE LAB CONFIGURATION* ... So why in the world would a default gateway be required? A default gateway is only required to

Re: *STUPID* IPSEC Routing Bug - No Default Gateway?!

2005-12-06 Thread Markus Friedl
On Tue, Dec 06, 2005 at 12:14:20AM -0500, Brian A. Seklecki wrote: OpenBSD requires that gateway A and gateway B have a default route declared no, you just need a route to the destination, this is a known but and there's no simple fix. however, just create a network route for the peer

Re: *STUPID* IPSEC Routing Bug - No Default Gateway?!

2005-12-06 Thread Brian A. Seklecki
no, you just need a route to the destination, this is a known a route to the destination of the tunnel...(that overlaps with the encap route...)... but and there's no simple fix. however, just create a network route for the peer that points back to the sender. this way ...or a route to the

*STUPID* IPSEC Routing Bug - No Default Gateway?!

2005-12-05 Thread Brian A. Seklecki
All: I'm CC'ing everyone who has previously posted the destination host unreachable behavior when setting up a generic 4-host IPSec VPN tunnel config per the template in vpn(8) / isakmpd.conf(5). NOTE: This is not the I can't ping the other side of the tunnel from the remote gateway because