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

    Ipsec errors please help need this up Monday

    IPsec
    6
    26
    33.0k
    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
      chrisreston
      last edited by

      one thing this is the error i get at the remote location, the server at the main office shows nothing under the ipsec log

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

        could it be the two subnets?

        main network is 192.168.0.0
        255.255.252.0

        remote is 192.168.1.0
        255.255.255.0

        Thanks

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

          Changed ip and now i get this again! Im getting ready to give up this is so frustrating. I have done ipsec on Cisco before

          Mar 30 19:10:18 racoon: [Unknown Gateway/Dynamic]: ERROR: such policy already exists. anyway replace it: 128.168.1.0/26[0] 192.168.0.0/22[0] proto=any dir=out
          Mar 30 19:10:18 racoon: [Unknown Gateway/Dynamic]: ERROR: such policy already exists. anyway replace it: 128.168.1.1/32[0] 128.168.1.0/26[0] proto=any dir=out
          Mar 30 19:10:18 racoon: [Unknown Gateway/Dynamic]: ERROR: such policy already exists. anyway replace it: 192.168.0.0/22[0] 128.168.1.0/26[0] proto=any dir=in
          Mar 30 19:10:18 racoon: [Unknown Gateway/Dynamic]: ERROR: such policy already exists. anyway replace it: 128.168.1.0/26[0] 128.168.1.1/32[0] proto=any dir=in

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

            Back to this! Im getting ready to throw in the towl in go buy a firewall for both places…

            Mar 30 21:32:05 racoon: [Unknown Gateway/Dynamic]: ERROR: such policy already exists. anyway replace it: 172.16.10.0/24[0] 192.168.0.0/22[0] proto=any dir=out
            Mar 30 21:32:05 racoon: [Unknown Gateway/Dynamic]: ERROR: such policy already exists. anyway replace it: 172.16.10.1/32[0] 172.16.10.0/24[0] proto=any dir=out
            Mar 30 21:32:05 racoon: [Unknown Gateway/Dynamic]: ERROR: such policy already exists. anyway replace it: 192.168.0.0/22[0] 172.16.10.0/24[0] proto=any dir=in
            Mar 30 21:32:05 racoon: [Unknown Gateway/Dynamic]: ERROR: such policy already exists. anyway replace it: 172.16.10.0/24[0] 172.16.10.1/32[0] proto=any dir=in

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

              @chrisreston:

              could it be the two subnets?

              main network is 192.168.0.0
              255.255.252.0

              remote is 192.168.1.0
              255.255.255.0

              That might be why the negotiation is failing, even if it were successful it's not going to work with those two subnets. 192.168.1.0/24 is within 192.168.0.0/22, the latter subnet will think the remote subnet is on its local network, hence it won't work.

              Not sure if negotiation would actually fail in that circumstance, but it would make sense if it did.

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

                @cmb:

                @chrisreston:

                could it be the two subnets?

                main network is 192.168.0.0
                255.255.252.0

                remote is 192.168.1.0
                255.255.255.0

                That might be why the negotiation is failing, even if it were successful it's not going to work with those two subnets. 192.168.1.0/24 is within 192.168.0.0/22, the latter subnet will think the remote subnet is on its local network, hence it won't work.

                Not sure if negotiation would actually fail in that circumstance, but it would make sense if it did.

                Actually that will work. I use such a setup to route traffic from remote home offices through the mainlocation:

                From the SPD-List at the mainlocation (10 remote locations):
                192.168.10.0/24 - 192.168.0.0/18 
                192.168.51.0/24 - 192.168.0.0/18
                192.168.57.0/24 - 192.168.0.0/18
                192.168.9.0/24 - 192.168.0.0/18
                192.168.43.0/24 - 192.168.0.0/18
                …

                The mainlocation that holds the 192.168.0.0/18 subnet in ipsec has some local subnets like 192.168.2.0/24 and others inside the /18-range that can all be reached from the home offices. Additionally the homeoffices can talk to each other. The traffic gets routed through the mainlocation and there are no tunnels from one homeoffice to another. This is the sam situation with overlapping/conflicting subnets.

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

                  Getting this again someone plese help…
                  I have two pfsense firewalls both with public ips on is at a remote location the other is at a main location. I have checked all settings over and over and they are correct!

                  Mar 31 15:32:18 racoon: ERROR: such policy already exists. anyway replace it: 10.0.0.0/16[0] 192.168.0.0/22[0] proto=any dir=out
                  Mar 31 15:32:18 racoon: ERROR: such policy already exists. anyway replace it: 10.0.0.1/32[0] 10.0.0.0/16[0] proto=any dir=out
                  Mar 31 15:32:18 racoon: [Unknown Gateway/Dynamic]: ERROR: such policy already exists. anyway replace it: 192.168.0.0/22[0] 10.0.0.0/16[0] proto=any dir=in
                  Mar 31 15:32:18 racoon: ERROR: such policy already exists. anyway replace it: 10.0.0.0/16[0] 10.0.0.1/32[0] proto=any dir=in

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

                    Please provide info on how the tunnels are setup on each side.

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

                      Heres the info

                      Remote Location

                      Interface = WAN
                      Local Subnet
                      Type - LAN Subnet

                      Remote Subnet
                      192.168.0.0 /22

                      Remote Gateway
                      66.17.X.X

                      Description
                      Remote

                      Phase1

                      Negotiation Mode
                      Agressive

                      My Identifier
                      My IP Address

                      Encryption Agorithm
                      SHA1

                      DH Key Group
                      2

                      Lifetime
                      28800

                      Authentication Method
                      Pre SHared Key

                      Pre Shared Key
                      St0rmw1nd

                      Phase2

                      Protocol
                      ESP

                      Encryption Alogorithms
                      Rijndael(AES)

                      Has Algorithms
                      SHA1

                      PS Key Group
                      2

                      Lifetime
                      84400

                      MAIN SITE
                      Interface = SPARKPLUG (second WAN, I have tried both)
                      Local Subnet
                      Type - LAN Subnet

                      Remote Subnet
                      10.0.0.0 /16

                      Remote Gateway
                      168.158.X.X

                      Description
                      Main
                      Phase1

                      Negotiation Mode
                      Agressive

                      My Identifier
                      My IP Address

                      Encryption Agorithm
                      SHA1

                      DH Key Group
                      2

                      Lifetime
                      28800

                      Authentication Method
                      Pre SHared Key

                      Pre Shared Key
                      St0rmw1nd

                      Phase2

                      Protocol
                      ESP

                      Encryption Alogorithms
                      Rijndael(AES)

                      Has Algorithms
                      SHA1

                      PS Key Group
                      2

                      Lifetime
                      84400

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

                        What i am trying to do is connect my remote office to my main office bot have pfsense installed. I want to be able to get my DHCP from the Main office as well. I just need a tunnel between the two PFsense firewalls in order to connect the two  and make it as one network. Am I missing something here?

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

                          now im getting this error

                          Mar 31 17:38:07 racoon: INFO: delete phase 2 handler.
                          Mar 31 17:38:07 racoon: ERROR: phase2 negotiation failed due to time up waiting for phase1. ESP 168.158.228.10[0]->66.17.85.18[0]
                          Mar 31 17:37:36 racoon: INFO: begin Aggressive mode.
                          Mar 31 17:37:36 racoon: INFO: initiate new phase 1 negotiation: 66.17.85.18[500]<=>168.158.228.10[500]
                          Mar 31 17:37:36 racoon: INFO: IPsec-SA request for 168.158.228.10 queued due to no phase1 found.

                          would it be easier to just go by a linksys router?

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

                            as you are doing this on a multiwan, die you add static routes for the site with the multiwan to the remote IP/32 via the gateway on wan2? There's a thread about that exact same issue already around at the forum.

                            I now understand the logs too: the one system is trying to talk to the other system with the dual wan on wan2 but the dual wan system answers at wan1 due to the missing route.

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

                              I guess I am confused, what if I just have the remote site look for wan1 instead? Would I add the static route in the rules section?

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

                                I both firewalls have the tunnels at wan you don't need static routes as it will use the defaultgateway then.

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

                                  still had issues that way.. also one note is that i am using the firewall as a dhcp server on the remote site. I have a dhcp server on the main site. How can I just link the two firewalls and use everything at the main site such as dhcp for the remote site? I am wanting to have the two sites as if they are 1

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

                                    You can work with dhcprelay to do that though I probably wouldn't do it that way. If the tunnel fails your clients won't be able to get dhcp. I would set up a second dhcp at the remote office (could be the pfSense) but assign the mainlocations dns server as the first dns to the clients. This way lookups should work forward and backward. As second dns you could assign the local dns forwarder of the pfSense so clients would still be able to access the internet even if the tunnel is down.

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

                                      Ok I am now using a sonicwall firewall at the remote location and the pfsense at the main. I have set everything up and now I am getting the following errors.

                                      Apr 1 11:31:35 racoon: ERROR: failed to pre-process packet.
                                      Apr 1 11:31:35 racoon: ERROR: failed to get sainfo.
                                      Apr 1 11:31:35 racoon: ERROR: failed to get sainfo.
                                      Apr 1 11:31:35 racoon: INFO: respond new phase 2 negotiation: 66.93.X.X[0]<=>168.158.X.X[0]
                                      Apr 1 11:31:34 racoon: INFO: ISAKMP-SA established 66.93.X.X[500]-168.158.X.X[500] spi:a84321dfbb05a217:2a9e8c8e5d8a57a4
                                      Apr 1 11:31:34 racoon: NOTIFY: couldn't find the proper pskey, try to get one by the peer's address.
                                      Apr 1 11:31:34 racoon: WARNING: No ID match.
                                      Apr 1 11:31:34 racoon: INFO: received Vendor ID: draft-ietf-ipsra-isakmp-xauth-06.txt
                                      Apr 1 11:31:34 racoon: INFO: received Vendor ID: draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-00
                                      Apr 1 11:31:34 racoon: INFO: begin Aggressive mode.

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

                                        You just made things more complicated. Try this guide, maybe it will help you http://doc.m0n0.ch/handbook-single/#id2608734

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

                                          In my experience you should never use aggressive mode with IPSEC.  1) It's less secure 2) Some of the check and balances (to include the mechanism for logging it) are missing.  Use Main mode.  If you need some closer to realtime help, email the support mailing list or you may be able to use the IRC channel.

                                          Curtis

                                          http://www.curtis-lamasters.com
                                          http://www.builtnetworks.com

                                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                          • F
                                            fastcon68
                                            last edited by

                                            Chris,
                                            Would a lilnksys be easier? NO.  Setting up tunnels with anything other than PfSense is difficuilt.  I used 10 different router and firewalls.  PfSense has been the simplist to setup and get working.  I have netgear, symantec vpn100 and 320's in service all work but some can really pull your hair out.

                                            I had this happen several times to me.  It looks like you have a couple of things going on.  I would make sure that you have your phase 1 settings correct.  I recently had a similiar issue.  I found that one end had was using agressive instead of MAIN.  I ended up removing all settings  on that router and rebuilding the tunnel after flashing the firmware.

                                            Send me a email to ron.carter@cartersweb.net and see what I can do to give you a hand.  I do agree with clamasters use MAIN mode.  I can give you a call tomorrow after 6:00 PM east coast time.  We should be able to get it to work with out too much trouble.

                                            I have my PFSense firewall up for over a year now with limited problems most have been self inflicted.  But I have been able to recover.  The forum is a great place to get issues resolved and too get help.

                                            RC

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