• PfSense 2.2 <-> pfSense 2.2 IPsec tunnel (RESOLVED)

    13
    0 Votes
    13 Posts
    5k Views
    C
    @Thale: Would "Restart Service" work, or does a "full stop/start" refer to an actual stop followed by a start? Stop it, then start it. A restart in some cases apparently doesn't apply all the config file changes that were made in some circumstance(s) I haven't fully quantified yet.
  • Ipsec arkoon et pfsense

    5
    0 Votes
    5 Posts
    1k Views
    C
    @doktornotor: No, absolutely not without posting relevant logs. This. Post your IPsec logs from both sides. There is no possible way to suggest what to do without having logs of why it's failing.
  • Main mode doesn't work

    2
    0 Votes
    2 Posts
    810 Views
    E
    Can you share the generated config on /var/etc/ipsec/ipsec.conf and the /var/etc/ipsec/racoon.conf from machines?
  • Ipsec 2.2 - loss of fragmented packets - possible bug?

    8
    0 Votes
    8 Posts
    3k Views
    E
    Yeah that means that something i\might be sending ip ids that are similar. Usually that is problem on client side since that breaks fragmentation and not only.
  • Connect between fortigate and pfsense

    1
    0 Votes
    1 Posts
    660 Views
    No one has replied
  • L2TP broken

    5
    0 Votes
    5 Posts
    1k Views
    O
    It clearly states in 1st post what is the problem.
  • IPSEC on pfsense 2.2, MOBIKE=NO option?

    2
    0 Votes
    2 Posts
    3k Views
    C
    There's still an open ticket to address that, it got pushed to 2.2.1.
  • IPSec lan-to-lan doesn't work after PfSense upgrade to 2.2

    21
    0 Votes
    21 Posts
    9k Views
    J
    To come back to the problem, if the tunnel is up but no traffic is coming through, can you further specify it? Is there only some traffic (like small ping packets) that get through or is it nothing at all. Because I experience a problem where fragmented packets get lost. https://forum.pfsense.org/index.php?topic=87610.0 Maybe you want to perform similar analysis to confirm that your current problem is similar or not.
  • A single IPSec tunnel goes down

    2
    0 Votes
    2 Posts
    758 Views
    M
    Just an update:  Today I have the following log entries and SEVERAL entries in the SAD table. Jan 28 08:24:04 racoon: INFO: unsupported PF_KEY message REGISTER Jan 28 08:23:29 racoon: [Roseville2Longview]: [206.x.x.x] ERROR: notification 32768 received in informational exchange. Any thoughts are welcome.  Just a thought; if, on the remote firewall, the key expiration is set to 24 hours AND zero kilobytes, will the key constantly be regenerated?  I have always thought not, but…
  • PFsense 2.2 upgrade - connected but no traffic?

    7
    0 Votes
    7 Posts
    2k Views
    M
    In my case all ends are Pfsense 2.2 This was not happening when we had 2.1x
  • IOS 8 Cisco IPSec -> pfSense 2.2 broken

    5
    0 Votes
    5 Posts
    7k Views
    D
    Same here, after i followed instructions in https://doc.pfsense.org/index.php/Upgrade_Guide#IPsec_Changes all is back to normal.
  • 2.2 versus 2.1.5

    2
    0 Votes
    2 Posts
    768 Views
    C
    Did you change the Sonicwall too or is its config still the same? Logs from both ends would be good to see.
  • Pfsense - Fortigate

    10
    0 Votes
    10 Posts
    3k Views
    valnarV
    And also add a firewall rule that allows traffic through that VPN interface.  So 3 things that need to be done on a Fortigate: VPN Routes FW rules
  • ERROR: none message must be encrypted

    3
    0 Votes
    3 Posts
    7k Views
    A
    Just want to add that this can also mean the shared secret does not match.  I just ran into this error recently.  The remote end (Checkpoint) revealed in the logs that it could be a shared secret mismatch.  Sure enough it was off on one character.  The pfsense side was initiating the connection.
  • IPsec routing workaround for pfsense own ip causes issues with SLES11.

    3
    0 Votes
    3 Posts
    1k Views
    C
    @cmb: Depends on what services you're using as to whether that route is required. For DNS, the DNS forwarder's domain overrides allow specifying a source IP, which negates the need for that route. Any service that lets you choose a source IP will work if you bind it to LAN. That really shouldn't break SLES, that should probably be reported there as a bug. Should be able to disable acceptance of ICMP redirects on the SLES host to work around it. Thanks for your reply. As I said, the services I absolutely need to work from pfsense through the tunnel are DNS resolution (not a forwarder, but pfsense itself needs to be able to resolve names, and the name server it needs to talk to is behind the tunnel), and NTP (the NTP server pfSense needs to use to sync it's won time is also behind the tunnel. As for reportign the SLES behaviour as a bug: No chance in hell this would ever be accepted as such. And I highly doubt it's a SLES specific issue at all. They don't touch the tcp/ip stack. Disabling redirect acceptance unforunately isn't possible here either, it's needed. Thanks again.
  • Windows internal VPN-Client to pfSENSE 2.2

    3
    0 Votes
    3 Posts
    1k Views
    A
    There is also a tutorial here https://doc.pfsense.org/index.php/L2TP/IPsec and on of the ongoing discussions is here
  • IPsec IKEv1 Configuration - with Mutual RSA + Xauth & Route all traffic

    5
    0 Votes
    5 Posts
    2k Views
    jimpJ
    The blog posts are the official announcements and included a note about that issue. It was not listed in the upgrade guide, so I corrected that: https://doc.pfsense.org/index.php/Upgrade_Guide#IPsec_Changes
  • Atom C2558 IPsec AES-CGM performance… using pfSense 2.2\. Yeah!

    1
    0 Votes
    1 Posts
    2k Views
    No one has replied
  • IPSec IKEv2 VPN - DLNA SSDP

    1
    0 Votes
    1 Posts
    1k Views
    No one has replied
  • Strange IPsec work?

    Locked
    3
    0 Votes
    3 Posts
    1k Views
    N
    Thanks for answear. I thought that is a issue with NAT, but can't get exactly what. That's the point: @JamesJohnson: The most probable cause is that your forwarding all UDP 500 traffic to the pfsense box. Which means that the mobile client can never establish a tunnel because its not receiving the response. Solved!
Copyright 2025 Rubicon Communications LLC (Netgate). All rights reserved.