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

    IOS (iphone/ipad) & 2.0-RC1 IPsec.. It almost works.

    IPsec
    7
    34
    15.6k
    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.
    • _
      _igor_
      last edited by

      I've tested your hint with outbound NAT which resulted in a complete inaccessibility of LAN and WAN. So i think thats wrong. I can see in the firewall-log only connections to my pfsense, but nothing goes out anymore. So i reviewed my settings regard to IPSEC and found out that at "IPSEC:Mobile clients" disabling the entry "Provide a list of accessible networks to clients" i get connected with LAN accessibility but no WAN.

      Reenabling "Provide a list of accessible networks to clients" resulted in full WAN-access via the IPSEC-tunnel.

      So no outbound-NAT is necessary. Only the "IPSEC any to any" rule and at WAN-side i have an "ESP to any" rule.

      Hope that helps getting a fully working Mobile IPSEC connection.

      edit: I have allowed ports 4500 and 500 UDP incoming from WAN, which i forgot to mention. sorry.

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • E
        eazydor
        last edited by

        @_igor_ are you still able to connect to your lan subnet?

        @pfsenseuser3 you should set your outbound nat mode to manual.

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • E
          eazydor
          last edited by

          @igor when i set "provide accesible networks" i do lose my default route over the tunnel and the client talk directly to the wan since their default route is set to the lan-gateway. this means no traffic to wan at all is routed trough your tunnel. that your client has established a connection and can talk to outbound doesnt mean directly that the traffic is passing your tunnel interface. apart from that i dont believe that theres right and wrong, rather than suitable or not. would you please take a look a you routing table when connected?

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • E
            ericab
            last edited by

            still waiting on a full HOWTO so it can be stickied…..

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • E
              eazydor
              last edited by

              @ericab can i help you with somewhat? i believe that theres no tutorial because mobile ipsec works perfectly since months now and everything you need to know to get a basic setup up and running you can find here in this forum.. but anyway, a clean and simple tutorial would decrease the amount of questions asked multiple times. that´s right..

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • E
                ericab
                last edited by

                @eazydor:

                @ericab can i help you with somewhat? i believe that theres no tutorial because mobile ipsec works perfectly since months now and everything you need to know to get a basic setup up and running you can find here in this forum.. but anyway, a clean and simple tutorial would decrease the amount of questions asked multiple times. that´s right..

                Apr 27 13:52:30 	racoon: ERROR: phase1 negotiation failed due to time up. 2b7c6d4c52e83eaa:77011e493f4e7949
Apr 27 13:51:49 	racoon: [Unknown Gateway/Dynamic]: NOTIFY: the packet is retransmitted by X.X.X.X[1880] (1).
Apr 27 13:51:46 	racoon: [Unknown Gateway/Dynamic]: NOTIFY: the packet is retransmitted by X.X.X.X[1880] (1).
Apr 27 13:51:43 	racoon: [Unknown Gateway/Dynamic]: NOTIFY: the packet is retransmitted by X.X.X.X[1880] (1).
Apr 27 13:51:40 	racoon: INFO: Adding xauth VID payload.
Apr 27 13:51:40 	racoon: INFO: received Vendor ID: DPD
Apr 27 13:51:40 	racoon: INFO: received Vendor ID: CISCO-UNITY
Apr 27 13:51:40 	racoon: INFO: received Vendor ID: draft-ietf-ipsra-isakmp-xauth-06.txt
Apr 27 13:51:40 	racoon: INFO: received Vendor ID: draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-02
Apr 27 13:51:40 	racoon: INFO: received Vendor ID: draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-02
Apr 27 13:51:40 	racoon: INFO: received Vendor ID: draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-03
Apr 27 13:51:40 	racoon: INFO: received Vendor ID: draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-04
Apr 27 13:51:40 	racoon: INFO: received Vendor ID: draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-05
Apr 27 13:51:40 	racoon: INFO: received Vendor ID: draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-06
Apr 27 13:51:40 	racoon: INFO: received Vendor ID: draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-07
Apr 27 13:51:40 	racoon: INFO: received Vendor ID: draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-08
Apr 27 13:51:40 	racoon: INFO: received Vendor ID: RFC 3947
Apr 27 13:51:40 	racoon: INFO: begin Aggressive mode.

                this is the holdup now.

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • E
                  eazydor
                  last edited by

                  please provide more information. can't help you like that.

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • E
                    ericab
                    last edited by

                    not sure where to start; what info would you need ?

                    i bet the problem is with "Proposal Checking"
                    mines set at default. is that what it should be ?

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • E
                      eazydor
                      last edited by

                      depends on the client you´re using. since the topic is about ios, yes proposal checking for ios-devices can be set to default. if you want you can describe your setup, configs, etc and i will take a look, but otherwise i cant help you.

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • E
                        ericab
                        last edited by

                        hi eazydor

                        here is how ive got my IPSec server setup:

                        Overview:

                        Mobile Clients:

                        http://dl.dropbox.com/u/66962/IPSec-pfSense/mobile-clients.jpg

                        Phase 1:

                        Phase 2:

                        now;
                        when i switch the listening interface for the ipsec server to my WIFI interface;
                        i can connect just fine, but no traffic passes. my wifi network is 192.168.3.0
                        it assigns me 192.168.4.1, which is right.

                        when i switch the interface to WAN;
                        (ive got the firewall rules setup properly to allow UDP 500/4500 on WAN)
                        (also have * * * * *; pass all on the IPSec firewall tab.)
                        the syslog shows the log from my previous post;
                        so not only does it not pass traffic, it wont even connect when listening on the WAN interface.

                        not sure if it matters, or if this may be the problem, but my wan interface is actually connected to another upstream router. (dont ask)
                        the pfsense box's WAN IP is on the DMZ of the upstream router, and the upstream router IS set to port forward ports 500, and 4500 UDP to pfsense WAN address; aka 192.168.1.142

                        Internet –-----> Cable Modem -------> Router (its local LAN is 192.168.1.1/24)--------> (wan address is 192.168.1.142) pfSense --------> my local LAN (192.168.2.0/24)

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • E
                          eazydor
                          last edited by

                          @ericab try this:

                          disable provide network list
                          enable nat traversal

                          under firewall - nat - outbound

                          set to manual
                          create new rule
                          if wan
                          proto any
                          src network 192.168.3.0/24 (assuming your wifi is your local network)
                          src port blank
                          dst not enable inverse option
                          dst type any
                          dst port blank
                          trans addr if adress
                          save & apply

                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • E
                            ericab
                            last edited by

                            eazydor;

                            well something has changed, im not sure if its progress… here is the new log after applying your settings:

                            Apr 27 19:49:19 	racoon: ERROR: phase1 negotiation failed due to time up. feabee14d99e6364:991e2e9cbef177e2
Apr 27 19:49:09 	racoon: [Self]: [192.168.1.142] ERROR: ignore the packet, received unexpecting payload type 1.
Apr 27 19:48:59 	racoon: [Self]: [192.168.1.142] ERROR: ignore the packet, received unexpecting payload type 1.
Apr 27 19:48:49 	racoon: [Self]: [192.168.1.142] ERROR: ignore the packet, received unexpecting payload type 1.
Apr 27 19:48:39 	racoon: [Self]: [192.168.1.142] ERROR: ignore the packet, received unexpecting payload type 1.
Apr 27 19:48:38 	racoon: [Self]: [192.168.1.142] ERROR: ignore the packet, received unexpecting payload type 1.
Apr 27 19:48:38 	racoon: NOTIFY: the packet is retransmitted by 192.168.1.142[500] (1).
Apr 27 19:48:35 	racoon: [Self]: [192.168.1.142] ERROR: ignore the packet, received unexpecting payload type 1.
Apr 27 19:48:35 	racoon: NOTIFY: the packet is retransmitted by 192.168.1.142[500] (1).
Apr 27 19:48:32 	racoon: [Self]: [192.168.1.142] ERROR: ignore the packet, received unexpecting payload type 1.
Apr 27 19:48:32 	racoon: NOTIFY: the packet is retransmitted by 192.168.1.142[500] (1).
Apr 27 19:48:29 	racoon: [Self]: [192.168.1.142] ERROR: ignore the packet, received unexpecting payload type 1.
Apr 27 19:48:29 	racoon: INFO: Adding xauth VID payload.
Apr 27 19:48:29 	racoon: [Self]: [192.168.1.142] INFO: Hashing 192.168.1.142[500] with algo #2
Apr 27 19:48:29 	racoon: [Self]: [192.168.1.142] INFO: Hashing 192.168.1.142[500] with algo #2
Apr 27 19:48:29 	racoon: INFO: Adding remote and local NAT-D payloads.
Apr 27 19:48:29 	racoon: [Self]: [192.168.1.142] INFO: Selected NAT-T version: RFC 3947
Apr 27 19:48:29 	racoon: INFO: received Vendor ID: DPD
Apr 27 19:48:29 	racoon: INFO: received Vendor ID: CISCO-UNITY
Apr 27 19:48:29 	racoon: INFO: received Vendor ID: draft-ietf-ipsra-isakmp-xauth-06.txt
Apr 27 19:48:29 	racoon: INFO: received Vendor ID: draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-02
Apr 27 19:48:29 	racoon: INFO: received Vendor ID: draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-02
Apr 27 19:48:29 	racoon: INFO: received Vendor ID: draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-03
Apr 27 19:48:29 	racoon: INFO: received Vendor ID: draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-04
Apr 27 19:48:29 	racoon: INFO: received Vendor ID: draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-05
Apr 27 19:48:29 	racoon: INFO: received Vendor ID: draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-06
Apr 27 19:48:29 	racoon: INFO: received Vendor ID: draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-07
Apr 27 19:48:29 	racoon: INFO: received Vendor ID: draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-08
Apr 27 19:48:29 	racoon: INFO: received Vendor ID: RFC 3947
Apr 27 19:48:29 	racoon: INFO: begin Aggressive mode.
Apr 27 19:48:29 	racoon: [Self]: INFO: respond new phase 1 negotiation: 192.168.1.142[500]<=>192.168.1.142[500]

                            192.168.1.142 is my WAN address.

                            but whats this :  ERROR: ignore the packet, received unexpecting payload type 1.

                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • E
                              eazydor
                              last edited by

                              i have tested your setup with my recommendations and it works flawlessly, at least for me and many people in this forum who have reported the same about this config. furthermore can't i see theoretically why it shouldn't work. so i think i can't help you further than that..

                              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • E
                                eazydor
                                last edited by

                                eventually you could try to force nat traversal.. see if that helps.. what ios version are you on?

                                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                • E
                                  ericab
                                  last edited by

                                  eazydor;

                                  ill try forcing nat-t

                                  ios v 4.3.0;  ipad2.

                                  possibly i should just give up and hope for a jailbreak so i can get openvpn on it. argg

                                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                  • E
                                    eazydor
                                    last edited by

                                    i know. ipsec can be hurt so bad. while openvpn is flying so light.. but these money making morons at cupertino will never let us run this natively.

                                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                    • _
                                      _igor_
                                      last edited by

                                      eazydor: your right, with network list enable it routes dircty to wan. shit. No traffic to wan via the tunnel. Outbound nat doesn't work here too. I loose all connect, including the lan access is dead.
                                      without the outbound nat entry:
                                      What i see is that all traffic ends at the pfsense-lan. DNS is seen at the firewall-log, but no answer is getting back to the phone. hmmm
                                      A traceroute from phone via the tunnel ends without any answer.
                                      ping is the same. i can ping all lan-clients, but wan is inaccessible.

                                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                      • E
                                        eazydor
                                        last edited by

                                        the problem, why i added this nat rule, was that ipsec-clients where talking to wan with their local ipsec-pool addresses. the servers obviously dropped the request since the origin was a private ip. this meant that every outbound traffic wasn't translated to the wan address and the server you´re connecting to doesnt know where to send the packet back. try doing a tcpdump on your wan interface/address and you should see clients doing request with their local ipsec-ip's and not getting replys. after you set the rule correctly you should see the same but clients doing request with the address of your wan interface and getting replys. if you can see the replys, the address translation is working and everything should be fine.

                                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                        • _
                                          _igor_
                                          last edited by

                                          clearly no. When i set up the nat forwarding, i instantly loose completely all access to the pfsense. I don't know why but tested that 3 times with same end. I'll try to setup the whole pfsense newly and try again.

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