Re: [strongSwan] High latency (satellite) link : what can we improve ?

2017-10-27 Thread Hoggins!
Hello Noel, I'll try to provide as much as I can. The sat connection and the machine in question are currently down, they are used like two or three times a year, and when they are, we "don't have time" to gather statusall messages and so on, hence the lack of information regarding what we

Re: [strongSwan] High latency (satellite) link : what can we improve ?

2017-10-26 Thread Noel Kuntze
Hello, Hoggins: Please provide the full list of information that is listed on the HelpRequests page. It helps immensely in understanding what the actual problem is. In fact, it saves us about 99,9% of the guessing. Kind regards Noel [1]

Re: [strongSwan] High latency (satellite) link : what can we improve ?

2017-10-26 Thread Tom Rymes
Odd, it works fine for us. The tunnel is set up as routed, and once traffic destined for the other side of the tunnel shows up, the connection is established and all is well. You've reached the limit of my abilities, hopefully someone else can help. > On Oct 26, 2017, at 5:14 AM, Hoggins!

Re: [strongSwan] High latency (satellite) link : what can we improve ?

2017-10-26 Thread Hoggins!
[...] Connection is *not* automatically established when needed [...] Le 26/10/2017 à 10:31, Hoggins! a écrit : > With this in place, strongswan statusall shows that there are policies > loaded, but connection is automatically established when needed, > although I thought this would be the case.

Re: [strongSwan] High latency (satellite) link : what can we improve ?

2017-10-26 Thread Hoggins!
Hmm.. I might have an understanding problem regarding the auto=route setting. With this in place, strongswan statusall shows that there are policies loaded, but connection is automatically established when needed, although I thought this would be the case. Maybe there's another setting that would

Re: [strongSwan] High latency (satellite) link : what can we improve ?

2017-10-25 Thread Hoggins!
Thank you Tom, Seeing your first answer, I also had this kind of memory, but I was unable to find it as well. I'll set this and try it out !     Hoggins! Le 25/10/2017 à 12:43, Tom Rymes a écrit : > I would recommend that you try auto=route. My experience suggests that it > significantly

Re: [strongSwan] High latency (satellite) link : what can we improve ?

2017-10-25 Thread Tom Rymes
I would recommend that you try auto=route. My experience suggests that it significantly improves the re-establishment of tunnels if they drop due to bad links. I think that the documentation also recommends this, but I can't seem to find that right now. Tom > On Oct 25, 2017, at 4:41 AM,

Re: [strongSwan] High latency (satellite) link : what can we improve ?

2017-10-25 Thread Hoggins!
Le 24/10/2017 à 18:52, Tom Rymes a écrit : > On Oct 24, 2017, at 11:53 AM, Hoggins! wrote: >> Hello, >> >> We sometimes use a satellite link for one of our site2sites tunnels, and >> there are times when the tunnel simply stops working. Maybe we don't >> wait enough for it to

Re: [strongSwan] High latency (satellite) link : what can we improve ?

2017-10-24 Thread Tom Rymes
On Oct 24, 2017, at 11:53 AM, Hoggins! wrote: > > Hello, > > We sometimes use a satellite link for one of our site2sites tunnels, and > there are times when the tunnel simply stops working. Maybe we don't > wait enough for it to respawn by itself, but then we just restart the

[strongSwan] High latency (satellite) link : what can we improve ?

2017-10-24 Thread Hoggins!
Hello, We sometimes use a satellite link for one of our site2sites tunnels, and there are times when the tunnel simply stops working. Maybe we don't wait enough for it to respawn by itself, but then we just restart the StrongSwan daemon manually and we're good to go for another couple of hours.