Netgate Discussion Forum
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Search
    • Register
    • Login

    Dynamic DNS ON BOTH ENDPOINTS

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved IPsec
    17 Posts 7 Posters 10.0k Views
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • C
      carboncopy
      last edited by

      @linuxman:

      I want to setup an always up IPSEC tunnel between two PFSENSE gateways that have dynamic IP addresses (cable modem and dsl modem). I know that this can be easily done on IPCOP, however, PFSENSE seems to be light years ahead of IPCOP when it comes to configuration. Is PFSENSE capable of this natively?

      Thanks,
      Linuxman

      I also wondered this.  However, as far as I know PF would require the IP address of the gateway/gateways.  This would really be defeating the purpose of using of dynamic IP addresses in the IPsec config area.  But I guess it depends on how tight you want to make your rules.  In theory if your PF rules were less restrictive I think it could work.  I haven't tested this theory myself, but I would like to try!

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • H
        hoba
        last edited by

        For your Information: this has been discussed at the Support ML: http://www.mail-archive.com/support@pfsense.com/msg03172.html

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • C
          carboncopy
          last edited by

          @hoba:

          For your Information: this has been discussed at the Support ML: http://www.mail-archive.com/support@pfsense.com/msg03172.html

          I don't sub to the ML.  MLs seem old school… But thanks for the info.

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • R
            rds_correia
            last edited by

            OT
            Well, sometimes you gotta go "old school" if you want to get something fixed.
            See, there was an issue, it was reported both on the MLs and here @ the forum.
            But it was the MLs that pushed sullrich enough for him to start working on a fix ;).
            I don't mind MLs, but if you ask me, every major project should have a forum instead of an ML…
            /OT
            So, now the $1.000.000 question is, has this been fixed in 0.95Alphas or is it still being fixed?
            Major kudos to the devs for taking care of this issue.
            If only you could do the same with OpenVPN and the OPTs issue... ;)
            Cheers

            pfSense 2.2.4 running on a HP DL385 G5
            WAN bce(4) + LAN em(4) + OPTn em(4) with 10 VLANs + Snort + PPTP VPN soon to be trashed by OVPN

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • S
              sullrich
              last edited by

              Huh?  I said don't depend on the issue being fixed anytime soon. Please reread the last post on the ML from me.

              @rds_correia:

              OT
              Well, sometimes you gotta go "old school" if you want to get something fixed.
              See, there was an issue, it was reported both on the MLs and here @ the forum.
              But it was the MLs that pushed sullrich enough for him to start working on a fix ;).
              I don't mind MLs, but if you ask me, every major project should have a forum instead of an ML…
              /OT
              So, now the $1.000.000 question is, has this been fixed in 0.95Alphas or is it still being fixed?
              Major kudos to the devs for taking care of this issue.
              If only you could do the same with OpenVPN and the OPTs issue... ;)
              Cheers

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • R
                rds_correia
                last edited by

                As far as I'm aware, this is your last post.
                @sullrich:

                Wed, 23 Nov 2005 15:19:15 -0800

                I will add a feature for it to automatically talk to the 2nd firewall
                and for it to tell the 2nd to reload its ipsec configuration.  This
                will solve all these problems.

                Only stipulation is that both endpoints will need to be pfSense, but
                thats not really something I'm concerned with as you should only be
                using pfSense :P

                And here you don't actually say if the issue will be solved soon or not.
                Or maybe I'm wrong and I didn't search the ML correctly?
                Cheers

                pfSense 2.2.4 running on a HP DL385 G5
                WAN bce(4) + LAN em(4) + OPTn em(4) with 10 VLANs + Snort + PPTP VPN soon to be trashed by OVPN

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • S
                  sullrich
                  last edited by

                  From: Scott Ullrich sullrich@gmail.comMailed-By: gmail.com
                  To: "info@cilient.com" info@cilient.comDate: Nov 24, 2005 2:01 PM
                  Subject: Re: [pfSense Support] Dynamic DNS ON BOTH ENDPOINTS
                  Reply | Reply to all | Forward | Print | Add sender to Contacts list | Trash this message | Report phishing | Show original | Message text garbled?

                  Not sure.  It will magically appear so don't depend on it as of yet./info@cilient.com/sullrich@gmail.com

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • R
                    rds_correia
                    last edited by

                    What?
                    You mean you sent that but it doesn't show up on the ML archive?
                    That's why I'm not a fan of MLs  ;D.
                    Cheers

                    pfSense 2.2.4 running on a HP DL385 G5
                    WAN bce(4) + LAN em(4) + OPTn em(4) with 10 VLANs + Snort + PPTP VPN soon to be trashed by OVPN

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • S
                      sullrich
                      last edited by

                      @rds_correia:

                      What?
                      You mean you sent that but it doesn't show up on the ML archive?
                      That's why I'm not a fan of MLs  ;D.
                      Cheers

                      I don't know what to tell you.  I can find any message  I need in 2 seconds with my gmail account + the mailing list.

                      And for the record, I prefer mailing lists over forums.  It cuts down on the BS.

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • R
                        rds_correia
                        last edited by

                        @sullrich:

                        And for the record, I prefer mailing lists over forums.  It cuts down on the BS.

                        There you have a point…
                        But I still prefer forums lol
                        Heck with so many posts you and I exchanged today I tell you what I prefer: SIP softphones.
                        But then there wouldn't be any BD with stored info.
                        But it sure would have made things easier today ;).
                        Cheers

                        pfSense 2.2.4 running on a HP DL385 G5
                        WAN bce(4) + LAN em(4) + OPTn em(4) with 10 VLANs + Snort + PPTP VPN soon to be trashed by OVPN

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • S
                          sullrich
                          last edited by

                          Yet another place we differ.  I hate the phone.

                          :P

                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • R
                            rds_correia
                            last edited by

                            No, sir.
                            I'm not a big fan of phones.
                            But then we would have done this in 5 minutes instead of 2 hours ;).
                            BTW a bit of BS: where do I get that avatar of yours but bigger?
                            I simply love it  :P
                            Cheers man

                            pfSense 2.2.4 running on a HP DL385 G5
                            WAN bce(4) + LAN em(4) + OPTn em(4) with 10 VLANs + Snort + PPTP VPN soon to be trashed by OVPN

                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • M
                              MrMoo
                              last edited by

                              Does this mean IPSEC in pfSense has the same problem with DHCP IP address changes as m0n0wall?

                              i.e. if a dynamic endpoint has an IP address change it will not reconnect until the phase lifetime expires, or IPSEC is manually restarted.

                              This is why I use the ovpn builds in m0n0wall for OpenVPN support.  I'm very tempted to change for Carp & IPSEC compression otherwise.

                              And if this is so can you slap it in big letters in the FAQ and elsewhere to make it more widely known.

                              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • D
                                dynamix
                                last edited by

                                Quote from: sullrich
                                Wed, 23 Nov 2005 15:19:15 -0800

                                I will add a feature for it to automatically talk to the 2nd firewall
                                and for it to tell the 2nd to reload its ipsec configuration.   This
                                will solve all these problems.

                                More than half of year has past since then; any progress on this, Sullrich?
                                All I want is the option ho have a Dynamic DNS address allowed in Remote Gateway field.
                                Automatic detection of address changes and remote party notification are improvements you cand develop later… :)
                                I don't mind to manualy reeestablish the connection.... for the beginning  ;)

                                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                • S
                                  sullrich
                                  last edited by

                                  No progress has been made.  1.0 is being released without this support.

                                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                  • First post
                                    Last post
                                  Copyright 2025 Rubicon Communications LLC (Netgate). All rights reserved.