On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 11:23:39AM -0400, Paul Wouters wrote:
> On Wed, 26 Aug 2015, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
>
> >>>Aug 5 14:50:13 ruggedcom pluto[8239]: "Test" #3: ignoring Delete SA
> >>>payload:
> >>>PROTO_IPSEC_ESP SA(0xbd111c17) not found (our SPI - bogus implementation)
>
> >>Although why am I not seeing the spi 0xbd111c17 anywhere? Does your bug
> >>report have more plutologs that we can trace down 0xbd111c17 and see if
> >>this is indeed an ESP SPI and not an ISAKMPD SPI?
>
> >Aug 11 09:08:22 ruggedcom pluto[25039]: "Test" #44: STATE_QUICK_R2: IPsec SA
> >established tunnel mode {ESP=>0xe701c648 <0x43b180e5 xfrm=3DES_0-HMAC_MD5
> >NATOA=none NATD=none DPD=none}
> >Aug 11 09:08:23 ruggedcom pluto[25039]: "Test" #45: transition from state
> >STATE_QUICK_R1 to state STATE_QUICK_R2
> >Aug 11 09:08:23 ruggedcom pluto[25039]: "Test" #45: STATE_QUICK_R2: IPsec SA
> >established tunnel mode {ESP=>0x20e9b4b8 <0x65bd9c08 xfrm=3DES_0-HMAC_MD5
> >NATOA=none NATD=none DPD=none}
>
> the SPI's don't match and neither do the state numbers. The delete is
> from state #3 but the SPIs are from #44 and #45 :)
>
> These are nog the logs we are looking for :)
Well Jeff is off today, but maybe tomorrow he can run the test again
and capture logs that match.
Any particular debug options you would like enabled?
At least you seem to have an idea where the problem occurs now.
--
Len Sorensen
_______________________________________________
Swan-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.libreswan.org/mailman/listinfo/swan-dev
