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

    IPSEC entre unidades diferentes.

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Portuguese
    1 Posts 1 Posters 308 Views 1 Watching
    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 Offline
      tsantana
      last edited by

      Pessoal,

      Boa tarde,

      Vou tentar ilustrar um cenário e eu gostaria da opinição de vocês.

      Tenho uma unidade (Unidade A) com a subrede 192.168.113.0/24 e 192.168.112.0/24, ja existe um tunel IPSEC entre estas unidades com a nossa matriz na subrede 192.168.70.0/24 através do pfsense com ip 192.168.70.41 e funciona muito bem. Entretanto a nossa área internacional tem uma outra unidade fechado em outro IPSEC com outro firewall no ip 192.168.70.50 (ASA).

      No IP 192.168.70.41, existem rotas que dizem assim, para falar com 192.168.114.0/23, enviar trafego para 192.168.70.1.
      Em 192.168.70.1 , que é nosso Switch CORE de rede a rota default é 192.168.70.50 que é o ASA falado anteriormente.

      O BO e a pergunta é, no PFSENSE devo utilizar uma VPN tipo TUNEL ou ROUTED ?

      O Arranjo final fica assim.

      Unidade A Pfsense Unidade B (Subrede 192.168.70.0/24) Unidade C
      192.168.113.0/24-----(Ipsec)------192.168.70.41-------------192.168.70.1---------------192.168.70.50-----(ipsec)------192.168.114.0/24
      192.168.112.0/24 Switch Core de Rede 192.168.115.0/24

      Estando em uma maquina na rede 192.168.113.0/24 efetuo ping ate a maquina 192.168.70.50 entretanto nao passo dele.
      A duvida, no que se refere a PFSENSE, o tunel deve ser um tunel normal ?

      Testes abaixo:

      root@ppms-client:~# ping 192.168.70.41
      PING 192.168.70.41 (192.168.70.41) 56(84) bytes of data.
      64 bytes from 192.168.70.41: icmp_seq=1 ttl=63 time=75.0 ms
      64 bytes from 192.168.70.41: icmp_seq=2 ttl=63 time=74.2 ms
      64 bytes from 192.168.70.41: icmp_seq=3 ttl=63 time=74.4 ms
      ^C
      --- 192.168.70.41 ping statistics ---
      3 packets transmitted, 3 received, 0% packet loss, time 2002ms
      rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 74.259/74.591/75.029/0.451 ms
      root@ppms-client:~# ping 192.168.70.1
      PING 192.168.70.1 (192.168.70.1) 56(84) bytes of data.
      64 bytes from 192.168.70.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=253 time=76.1 ms
      64 bytes from 192.168.70.1: icmp_seq=2 ttl=253 time=76.6 ms
      64 bytes from 192.168.70.1: icmp_seq=3 ttl=253 time=76.9 ms
      ^C
      --- 192.168.70.1 ping statistics ---
      3 packets transmitted, 3 received, 0% packet loss, time 2003ms
      rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 76.125/76.550/76.919/0.326 ms
      root@ppms-client:~# ping 192.168.70.50
      PING 192.168.70.50 (192.168.70.50) 56(84) bytes of data.
      64 bytes from 192.168.70.50: icmp_seq=1 ttl=253 time=77.0 ms
      64 bytes from 192.168.70.50: icmp_seq=2 ttl=253 time=74.8 ms
      64 bytes from 192.168.70.50: icmp_seq=3 ttl=253 time=77.6 ms
      ^C
      --- 192.168.70.50 ping statistics ---
      3 packets transmitted, 3 received, 0% packet loss, time 2003ms
      rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 74.836/76.498/77.649/1.245 ms
      root@ppms-client:~#

      Obrigado a todos por alguma luz.

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