Philipp Rusch wrote:
> Tom Eastep schrieb:
>> -SNIP-
>> Have you tried my suggestion of configuring a single IPSEC zone?
>>
>> -Tom
>>   
> Yes, I followed your suggestion and made only one zone for all the
> 172.30.0.0/16 tunnels.
> This works wonderful now and reduces restart times a lot.
> BTW, our firewall is running SuSE 10.1 x86_64 .
> So for now there is only one small thing left, that's the strange
> behaviour about that
> MTU size with 1350 bytes, which still is a myth to me.
> Is it possible that my (rather small routers) can not find out about
> MTU, because I am
> blocking the type of ICMP-packets they need for discovering ?
> 

Specifying the mtu for ipsec zones is usually necessary in any
configuration. It doesn't need to be *your* routers that are misconfigured
-- it can be any router carrying traffic that is encrypted/decrypted by your
firewall.

-Tom
-- 
Tom Eastep    \ Nothing is foolproof to a sufficiently talented fool
Shoreline,     \ http://shorewall.net
Washington USA  \ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PGP Public Key   \ https://lists.shorewall.net/teastep.pgp.key

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >>  http://get.splunk.com/
_______________________________________________
Shorewall-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/shorewall-users

Reply via email to