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

IPSec Site-to-Site - Green - but no traffic

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved IPsec
6 Posts 2 Posters 8.6k 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.
  • P
    prandall
    last edited by Oct 2, 2012, 2:48 PM

    I'm quite a noob with IPSec. I am trying to set up a site to site VPN. But I think I am missing something.

    The tunnel connects showing the green arrow but no traffic is going over the tunnel.

    I am using version 2.01

    This is my network topography

    Site A:
    Client PC 192.168.11.199
    pfSense LAN 192.168.11.1
    pfSense WAN 107.XX.XX.195 ( Static IP ) DG is 107.XX.XX.193
    Cablevision Router 107.XX.XX.193

    Site B:
    Comcast Modem/Router WAN 69.XX.XX.109
    Comcast Modem/Router LAN 10.1.10.1
    pfSense WAN 10.1.10.16 DG is 10.1.10.1
    pfSense LAN 192.168.12.1
    Client PC 192.168.12.199 ( No actual client connected yet)

    I don't know what to post from IPSec, but the tunnel connects, but the SAD tab shows no data.

    Phase 1 and Phase 2 seem to connect.

    I added Firewall rules under IPSEC Tab as follows:

    Proto: TCP
    Source *
    Port *
    Destination: LAN Net
    Port *
    Gateway *
    Queue none
    Schedule
    Description

    So, I dont know if there is something else I need to do. I try to ping from pfsense site B to client on site A and get nothing.

    Do I need to setup a Gateway and route?

    Completely frustrated, been working on this for  a week.

    Thanks in advance for help.

    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
    • P
      podilarius
      last edited by Oct 2, 2012, 3:26 PM

      Sounds like the tunnel is connecting, but you forgot to add the allow rules in the firewall. There is an IPSEC or OpenVPN tab in the firewall rules where you need to add an allow rule. Needs to be rather open if for road warriors and can be closed to just remote subnets if it is a site to site.

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • P
        prandall
        last edited by Oct 3, 2012, 11:19 AM

        If you are referring to the firewall rules under IPSec tab, I think that is what I listed at the bottom of the post.

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • P
          podilarius
          last edited by Oct 3, 2012, 12:25 PM

          Yes, your rule states TCP yet you are trying with a ping which is ICMP protocol. So the firewall is blocking it.
          To test, change the protocol from TCP to any and retest with ping, or add a rule for ICMP:any.

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • P
            prandall
            last edited by Oct 3, 2012, 1:07 PM

            Ok, thanks for your help so far, still not able to ping, but I'm sure that rule was part of the problem.
            I set the protocol on both ends to any.

            There is a Firewall rule in the LAN tab, that I don't remember adding, could this be slurping traffic?

            Proto *
            Source LAN Net
            Port         *
            Destination  *
            Port         *
            Gateway    *

            I did pfTop via SSH on one host. This looks like the tunnel trying to work.

            From A
            PR  D SRC                          DEST                    GW                        STATE  AGE
            tcp  O 192.168.11.199:4472  64.xx.xx.161:80      108.xx.xx.195:33403  4:4  43h

            Anyway, any other suggestions?

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • P
              prandall
              last edited by Oct 3, 2012, 2:11 PM

              IT WORKS!, Thanks for your help Podilarius. After re-saving the Phase II entries something clicked, so I can now ping remote hosts. Which I of course would not have been able to without that rule change :)

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              6 out of 6
              • First post
                6/6
                Last post
              Copyright 2025 Rubicon Communications LLC (Netgate). All rights reserved.
                This community forum collects and processes your personal information.
                consent.not_received