I can't  help you further easily. You need to check what happens to the packets 
and what actually needs to happen.

On 30.04.2017 23:25, Dusan Ilic wrote:
>
> I have added following on local router
>
> iptables -t nat -I POSTROUTING -s 10.1.1.0/26 -o vlan847 -m policy --dir out 
> --pol ipsec --proto esp -j ACCEPT
> (before it was iptables -t nat -I POSTROUTING -s 10.1.1.0/26 -d 
> 192.168.1.0/24 -o vlan847 -m policy --dir out --pol ipsec --proto esp -j 
> ACCEPT)
>
> And on remote router
>
> iptables -I FORWARD -s 10.1.1.0/26 -j ACCEPT
> iptables -t nat -I POSTROUTING -s 10.1.1.0/26 -j MASQUERADE
>
> And now when the tunnel is up, internet doesnt work at all (all pings time 
> out), however I can still reach the remote subnet 192.168.1.0. What is the 
> best way to troubleshoot, if the error is on the local gateway or on the 
> remote?
>
>
> Den 2017-04-30 kl. 20:39, skrev 
> [email protected]:
>> Fix your NAT rules.
>>
>> Am 30. April 2017 12:28:48 MESZ schrieb Dusan Ilic <[email protected]>:
>>
>>     Okey, so I found info about adding a "passthrough" connection for my 
>>     local LAN. I have done this now and when i start the connection the 
>>     network connection isn't cut off, however, it seems like my internet 
>>     traffic i still using my local gateway (browsed to a check my ip-page). 
>>     I can however still ping the remote network.
>>
>>     Here is my tabel 220
>>
>>     # ip route show table 220
>>     10.1.1.0/26 <http://10.1.1.0/26> dev br0  proto static  src 10.1.1.1 
>> <http://10.1.1.1> # LAN passthrough?
>>     default via 85.24.x.x dev vlan847  proto static  src 10.1.1.1 
>> <http://10.1.1.1>
>>
>>     So instead of a route to 192.168.1.0/24 <http://192.168.1.0/24> a 
>> default route is added, but it 
>>     looks like it doesn't go through the tunnel... traffic to 192.168.1.0/24 
>> <http://192.168.1.0/24> 
>>     do get tunneled still though.
>>
>>     Den 2017-04-30 kl. 11:59, skrev Dusan Ilic:
>>
>>         Hello again, It worked with the hack! Thank you! Last question 
>> (hopefully! :P)), if I would like to use the remote endpoint to route *all* 
>> traffic over the vpn, is below the correct way? I have changed rightsubnet 
>> locally to 0.0.0.0/0 and leftsubnet remotely to 0.0.0.0/0, I have also added 
>> NAT on the remote router for the local subnet on the local endpoint, and 
>> finally I have added the local subnet to table 220 on the local router. I 
>> have also replaced the Iptable forward rule on local endpoint with 0.0.0.0/0 
>> instead of only the remote subnet. However, when I up the connection on the 
>> local router in a couple of seconds my SSH connection stops responding, and 
>> I cannot reach the local gateway or internet any longer. I have to reboot 
>> the local router to get access again. Is this familiar to you? What could be 
>> happening here? Den 2017-04-29 kl. 18:44, skrev Noel Kuntze:
>>
>>             Hello Dusan, On 29.04.2017 18:34, Dusan Ilic wrote:
>>
>>                 It works! I found a hidden setting under Phase 1 in 
>> Fortigate where i could add the local ID. Added it's dynamic dns hostname 
>> and now it connects. 
>>
>>             Great!
>>
>>                 However, I still have issues with another endpoint I'm 
>> testing. My local endpoint have Strongswan 5.5.1 and the remote endpoint 
>> have 4.5.2. Would that present any issues or incompatibilites? Unfortunately 
>> it's not possible to upgrade the remote endpoint (Strongswan). 
>>
>>             Pluto resolves IDs that are FQDNs. I think there was a hack, 
>> where you add the at-character in front of the FQDN in the ID settings and 
>> that stops it from doing that. Might apply to charon, too in such a low 
>> version number. Try the hack.
>>
>>                 I tried below, per your suggestion left=%local.example 
>> leftid=local.example right=%remote.example rightid=remote.example 
>> remote.example : PSK "PSKGOESHERE" Log when local sides initiates 
>> connection: parsed IKE_AUTH response 1 [ N(AUTH_FAILED) ] received 
>> AUTHENTICATION_FAILED notify error 
>>
>>             You need to read the remote logs when the remote side sends you 
>> an error message.
>>
>>                 Log when remote side initiates connection: Apr 29 16:32:20 
>> R6250 daemon.info <http://daemon.info> charon: 10[CFG] looking for peer 
>> configs matching 85.24.x.x[85.24.x.x]...94.254.x.x[94.254.x.x] Apr 29 
>> 16:32:20 R6250 daemon.info <http://daemon.info> charon: 10[CFG] no matching 
>> peer config found It looks like the same issue, the remote endpoint doesnt 
>> send the configured ID? 
>>
>>             Yes.
>>
>>                 And another question, when using dynamic hostnames instead 
>> of IP's as "right", how often does Strongswan make a new DNS-lookup? How 
>> does Strongswan handle the situation where let's say the remote endpoint 
>> suddenly receives a new IP? Or if the local side receives a new IP during 
>> established connection? 
>>
>>             strongSwan does a DNS lookup whenever it tries to select a 
>> configuration. Well, depends on if mobike is used or no and if the peer 
>> who's IP changed can't send any traffic anymore. Mobike and connectivity: 
>> IKE_SA and CHILD_SAs are migrated No mobike and connectivity: Don't know. 
>> Maybe a new IKE_SA is negotiated, because the one peer knows the local 
>> address has vanished (and the CHILD_SAs migrated?). No mobike and no 
>> connectivity: Timeout, if DPD is used. Otherwise the IKE_SA and CHILD_SAs 
>> remain until the remote peer connects again. Mobike and no connectivity: 
>> Timeout, if DPD is used. Otherwise the IKE_SA and CHILD_SAs remain until the 
>> remote peer connects again. Kind regards, Noel
>>
>>         
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>         Users mailing list [email protected] 
>> https://lists.strongswan.org/mailman/listinfo/users 
>>
>>
>> Sent from mobile 


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.strongswan.org/mailman/listinfo/users

Reply via email to