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

    IPsec tunnel problem with 2.1.5 and 2.2rc

    2.2 Snapshot Feedback and Problems - RETIRED
    4
    35
    18.1k
    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.
    • T
      tracer
      last edited by

      I think this end is initiator and responder, b/c the other side opens the tunnels as well.
      BTW I already did a packettrace on the "other" interface to see if there's traffic (UDP&port 500) coming or going.
      Nothing !
      But I can check the other Pfs 2.1.5 tomorrow.
      I deliberately change the tunnel to this other IF and check the the dyn address points to the correct IP and IF.

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • T
        tracer
        last edited by

        Update:
        Just check the 2.1.5 side and no packets go to the wrong Public IF of the 2.2.

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • T
          tracer
          last edited by

          Updated and still same tunnnel problems ?

          2.2-RC (amd64)
          built on Fri Jan 16 11:53:08 CST 2015

          @Ermal: Do you think my NAT & Firewall Rules are ok on the WAN IF ?

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • D
            doktornotor Banned
            last edited by

            What NAT again? You've already been told you cannot NAT IPsec.

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • T
              tracer
              last edited by

              ::)
              Outbound NAT:
              Automatic Rules.

              And pls let me know where I was told to "not NAT IPsec" ?

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • T
                tracer
                last edited by

                And BTW a just captured packets on my WAN and could see ISAKMP (Main Mode) going forth and back between both pfsenses.

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • D
                  doktornotor Banned
                  last edited by

                  @tracer:

                  And pls let me know where I was told to "not NAT IPsec" ?

                  https://forum.pfsense.org/index.php?topic=86590.msg475029#msg475029

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • T
                    tracer
                    last edited by

                    @doktornotor: Checking my reply, I said I remove "any NAT rules" meaning the ones I manually created !
                    But as known, the "Automatic Outbound NAT rules" persist due the mode !
                    So I'm pretty sure that if config is correctly interpreted by pfSense no manual rule should interfere.

                    But my Question was if any of the other inbound rules could interfere with VPN ?
                    Do you have an answer for this ?

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

                      The automatic outbound NAT rules won't hurt anything with IPsec.

                      For inbound, if you have a port forward on UDP 500 or ESP traffic, that'll break it also. If you have a 1:1 NAT using the public IP where it terminates, that'll forward the traffic to an internal host and break things as well.

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • T
                        tracer
                        last edited by

                        Hmm, thanks, but I can't find any inbound NATs with 500.
                        Maybe we should look at it using our old support contract ?

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

                          @tracer:

                          Maybe we should look at it using our old support contract ?

                          Commercial support is definitely the best answer. Your support expired over 5 years ago though, if you purchase to activate support on your account again, we can definitely assist.

                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • T
                            tracer
                            last edited by

                            I'll pm you on this, ok ?

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