Le 14.01.2011 03:27, kevin vpn a écrit :
On Thu, 13 Jan 2011 08:47:14 +0100
Romain De Rasse<[email protected]> wrote:
Hi,
I'm setting up an IPSec VPN tunnel with a Juniper SSG140 appliance
and I'm having an issue. The Juniper type of IPSec VPN is route-based
Dialup VPN.
When the client device is connected to the VPN, it's still able to
access the local LAN even if I use an "IPsec Policy Manual
Configuration" along with this "Topology Entry" :
- Type : Include
- Address : 0.0.0.0
- Netmask : 0.0.0.0
Is there a way to prevent the connected client device from accessing
the local LAN ?
Hi roms,
When you do a route-based VPN on NetScreen, that can be made into a
bi-directional tunnel. You should try doing a traceroute (tracert in
Windows CMD prompt) to see if your traffic is actually going out to the
gateway and then coming back. If that is what is happening, then you
need to put a rule preventing the local LAN access on the NetScreen.
Alternatively, is there a chance that you have both a wired and
wireless connection on your PC, and that the local LAN access is
happening via the other adapter?
_______________________________________________
vpn-help mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.shrew.net/mailman/listinfo/vpn-help
Hi Kevin,
thanks for your answer. Id did a traceroute and I'm sure that the ping
doesn't enter the tunnel and then comes back in the local lan through
the tunnel.
The wireless adapter of my laptop is desactivated.
I found a solution, but it's not a good one : in order to prevent the
local LAN access, there must be a route with next hop in the tunnel
(that is, an Include Topology Entry) which match more precisely the
local traffic than the directly connected route I can see using the
"route print" dos command.
For example, a client in the 192.168.0.0/24 LAN must have this Topology
Entries (or something like that I tried it at work yesterday I'm not
sure about the details) :
- Type : Include
- Address : 0.0.0.0
- Netmask : 0.0.0.0
AND
- Type : Include
- Address : 192.168.0.0
- Netmask : 255.255.255.0
This is a bad solution for me because the clients will be located in a
lot of different local LAN address plans, and the configurations of the
clients has to be the same in order to perform simple remote automatic
installation. Moreover the users are not administrators, it will cause a
lot of problems if they have to perform this little part of the
configuration.
I should check the source code and try to adapt it :) but I'm running
out of time.
Thanks anyway.
roms
_______________________________________________
vpn-help mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.shrew.net/mailman/listinfo/vpn-help
