Has anyone got a VPN to a Draytek working?



  • I'm really struggling.....


  • Netgate Administrator

    I have seen that a number of times. Draytek have a lot of devices and firmware versions of course.

    More detail required. How are you configuring it? What's happening / not happening?

    Check the logs for errors.

    Steve



  • The Draytek's logs show:
    2019-02-24 17:57:23 [IPSEC/IKE][L2L][6:OHPfsense2][@81.143.205.132] err: infomational exchange message is invalid 'cos incomplete ISAKMP SA
    2019-02-24 17:57:18 [IPSEC/IKE][L2L][6:OHPfsense2][@81.143.205.132] err: infomational exchange message is invalid 'cos incomplete ISAKMP SA
    2019-02-24 17:57:15 [IPSEC/IKE][L2L][6:OHPfsense2][@81.143.205.132] err: infomational exchange message is invalid 'cos incomplete ISAKMP SA
    2019-02-24 17:57:14 IKE ==>, Next Payload=ISAKMP_NEXT_ID, Exchange Type = 0x2, Message ID = 0x0
    2019-02-24 17:57:14 NAT-Traversal: Using RFC 3947, no NAT detected
    2019-02-24 17:57:14 IKE <==, Next Payload=ISAKMP_NEXT_KE, Exchange Type = 0x2, Message ID = 0x0
    2019-02-24 17:57:14 IKE ==>, Next Payload=ISAKMP_NEXT_KE, Exchange Type = 0x2, Message ID = 0x0
    2019-02-24 17:57:14 Accept Phase1 prorosals : ENCR OAKLEY_AES_CBC, HASH OAKLEY_SHA
    2019-02-24 17:57:14 IKE <==, Next Payload=ISAKMP_NEXT_SA, Exchange Type = 0x2, Message ID = 0x0
    2019-02-24 17:57:14 IKE ==>, Next Payload=ISAKMP_NEXT_SA, Exchange Type = 0x2, Message ID = 0x0
    2019-02-24 17:57:14 [IPSEC/IKE][L2L][6:OHPfsense2][@81.143.205.132] Initiating IKE Main Mode
    2019-02-24 17:57:14 Initiating IKE Main Mode to 81.143.205.132
    2019-02-24 17:57:14 Dialing Node6 (OHPfsense2) : 81.143.205.132
    2019-02-24 17:57:13 [IPSEC][L2L][6:OHPfsense2][@81.143.205.132] IKE release: state linking
    2019-02-24 17:57:13 [L2L][DOWN][IPsec][@6:OHPfsense2]
    2019-02-24 17:57:13 DropVPN() VPN : L2L Dial-out, Profile index = 6, Name = OHPfsense2, ifno = 11
    2019-02-24 17:57:13 Re-dial L2L[6], ifno: 11, status: 3 from WEB...
    2019-02-24 17:57:12 [IPSEC/IKE][L2L][6:OHPfsense2][@81.143.205.132] err: infomational exchange message is invalid 'cos incomplete ISAKMP SA
    2019-02-24 17:57:11 IKE ==>, Next Payload=ISAKMP_NEXT_HASH, Exchange Type = 0x5, Message ID = 0x5eda19cd
    2019-02-24 17:57:11 IKE <==, Next Payload=ISAKMP_NEXT_HASH, Exchange Type = 0x5, Message ID = 0x179c107
    2019-02-24 17:57:06 [IPSEC/IKE][L2L][6:OHPfsense2][@81.143.205.132] err: infomational exchange message is invalid 'cos incomplete ISAKMP SA
    2019-02-24 17:57:03 [IPSEC/IKE][L2L][6:OHPfsense2][@81.143.205.132] err: infomational exchange message is invalid 'cos incomplete ISAKMP SA
    2019-02-24 17:57:03 IKE ==>, Next Payload=ISAKMP_NEXT_ID, Exchange Type = 0x2, Message ID = 0x0
    2019-02-24 17:57:03 NAT-Traversal: Using RFC 3947, no NAT detected
    2019-02-24 17:57:03 IKE <==, Next Payload=ISAKMP_NEXT_KE, Exchange Type = 0x2, Message ID = 0x0
    2019-02-24 17:57:03 IKE ==>, Next Payload=ISAKMP_NEXT_KE, Exchange Type = 0x2, Message ID = 0x0
    2019-02-24 17:57:03 Accept Phase1 prorosals : ENCR OAKLEY_AES_CBC, HASH OAKLEY_SHA
    2019-02-24 17:57:03 IKE <==, Next Payload=ISAKMP_NEXT_SA, Exchange Type = 0x2, Message ID = 0x0
    2019-02-24 17:57:03 IKE ==>, Next Payload=ISAKMP_NEXT_SA, Exchange Type = 0x2, Message ID = 0x0
    2019-02-24 17:57:03 [IPSEC/IKE][L2L][6:OHPfsense2][@81.143.205.132] Initiating IKE Main Mode
    2019-02-24 17:57:03 Initiating IKE Main Mode to 81.143.205.132
    2019-02-24 17:57:03 Dialing Node6 (OHPfsense2) : 81.143.205.132
    2019-02-24 17:57:02 [IPSEC][L2L][6:OHPfsense2][@81.143.205.132] IKE link timeout: state linking

    Does this make any sense to anyone? I've got a site-to-site to a Watchguard working, but not this one. Thanks in anticipation!



  • pfSense logs:
    Feb 24 18:02:41 charon 11[NET] <13832> received packet: from 88.97.12.47[500] to 81.143.205.132[500] (92 bytes)
    Feb 24 18:02:41 charon 11[ENC] <13832> invalid ID_V1 payload length, decryption failed?
    Feb 24 18:02:41 charon 11[ENC] <13832> could not decrypt payloads
    Feb 24 18:02:41 charon 11[IKE] <13832> message parsing failed
    Feb 24 18:02:41 charon 11[ENC] <13832> generating INFORMATIONAL_V1 request 2097971478 [ HASH N(PLD_MAL) ]
    Feb 24 18:02:41 charon 11[NET] <13832> sending packet: from 81.143.205.132[500] to 88.97.12.47[500] (76 bytes)
    Feb 24 18:02:41 charon 11[IKE] <13832> ID_PROT request with message ID 0 processing failed
    Feb 24 18:02:42 charon 01[CFG] vici client 96 connected
    Feb 24 18:02:42 charon 10[CFG] vici client 96 registered for: list-sa
    Feb 24 18:02:42 charon 11[CFG] vici client 96 requests: list-sas
    Feb 24 18:02:42 charon 10[CFG] vici client 96 disconnected
    Feb 24 18:02:46 charon 13[JOB] <13831> deleting half open IKE_SA with 88.97.12.47 after timeout
    Feb 24 18:02:46 charon 13[IKE] <13831> IKE_SA (unnamed)[13831] state change: CONNECTING => DESTROYING
    Feb 24 18:02:48 charon 13[NET] <13833> received packet: from 88.97.12.47[500] to 81.143.205.132[500] (204 bytes)
    Feb 24 18:02:48 charon 13[ENC] <13833> parsed ID_PROT request 0 [ SA V V V V V V ]
    Feb 24 18:02:48 charon 13[CFG] <13833> looking for an IKEv1 config for 81.143.205.132...88.97.12.47
    Feb 24 18:02:48 charon 13[CFG] <13833> candidate: %any...%any, prio 24
    Feb 24 18:02:48 charon 13[CFG] <13833> candidate: 81.143.205.132...88.97.12.47, prio 3100
    Feb 24 18:02:48 charon 13[CFG] <13833> found matching ike config: 81.143.205.132...88.97.12.47 with prio 3100
    Feb 24 18:02:48 charon 13[IKE] <13833> received DPD vendor ID
    Feb 24 18:02:48 charon 13[IKE] <13833> received NAT-T (RFC 3947) vendor ID
    Feb 24 18:02:48 charon 13[IKE] <13833> received draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-03 vendor ID
    Feb 24 18:02:48 charon 13[IKE] <13833> received draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-02\n vendor ID
    Feb 24 18:02:48 charon 13[IKE] <13833> received draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-02 vendor ID
    Feb 24 18:02:48 charon 13[IKE] <13833> received draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-00 vendor ID
    Feb 24 18:02:48 charon 13[IKE] <13833> 88.97.12.47 is initiating a Main Mode IKE_SA
    Feb 24 18:02:48 charon 13[IKE] <13833> IKE_SA (unnamed)[13833] state change: CREATED => CONNECTING
    Feb 24 18:02:48 charon 13[CFG] <13833> selecting proposal:
    Feb 24 18:02:48 charon 13[CFG] <13833> proposal matches
    Feb 24 18:02:48 charon 13[CFG] <13833> received proposals: IKE:AES_CBC_256/HMAC_SHA1_96/PRF_HMAC_SHA1/MODP_2048
    Feb 24 18:02:48 charon 13[CFG] <13833> configured proposals: IKE:AES_CBC_256/HMAC_SHA1_96/PRF_HMAC_SHA1/MODP_2048
    Feb 24 18:02:48 charon 13[CFG] <13833> selected proposal: IKE:AES_CBC_256/HMAC_SHA1_96/PRF_HMAC_SHA1/MODP_2048
    Feb 24 18:02:48 charon 13[IKE] <13833> sending XAuth vendor ID
    Feb 24 18:02:48 charon 13[IKE] <13833> sending DPD vendor ID
    Feb 24 18:02:48 charon 13[IKE] <13833> sending NAT-T (RFC 3947) vendor ID
    Feb 24 18:02:48 charon 13[ENC] <13833> generating ID_PROT response 0 [ SA V V V ]
    Feb 24 18:02:48 charon 13[NET] <13833> sending packet: from 81.143.205.132[500] to 88.97.12.47[500] (136 bytes)
    Feb 24 18:02:48 charon 13[NET] <13833> received packet: from 88.97.12.47[500] to 81.143.205.132[500] (356 bytes)
    Feb 24 18:02:48 charon 13[ENC] <13833> parsed ID_PROT request 0 [ KE No NAT-D NAT-D ]
    Feb 24 18:02:48 charon 13[CFG] <13833> candidate "bypasslan", match: 1/1/24 (me/other/ike)
    Feb 24 18:02:48 charon 13[CFG] <13833> candidate "con3000", match: 1/1/3100 (me/other/ike)
    Feb 24 18:02:48 charon 13[ENC] <13833> generating ID_PROT response 0 [ KE No NAT-D NAT-D ]
    Feb 24 18:02:48 charon 13[NET] <13833> sending packet: from 81.143.205.132[500] to 88.97.12.47[500] (372 bytes)
    Feb 24 18:02:48 charon 13[NET] <13833> received packet: from 88.97.12.47[500] to 81.143.205.132[500] (92 bytes)
    Feb 24 18:02:48 charon 13[ENC] <13833> invalid ID_V1 payload length, decryption failed?
    Feb 24 18:02:48 charon 13[ENC] <13833> could not decrypt payloads
    Feb 24 18:02:48 charon 13[IKE] <13833> message parsing failed
    Feb 24 18:02:48 charon 13[ENC] <13833> generating INFORMATIONAL_V1 request 2433405080 [ HASH N(PLD_MAL) ]
    Feb 24 18:02:48 charon 13[NET] <13833> sending packet: from 81.143.205.132[500] to 88.97.12.47[500] (76 bytes)
    Feb 24 18:02:48 charon 13[IKE] <13833> ID_PROT request with message ID 0 processing failed


  • Netgate Administrator

    @orangehand said in Has anyone got a VPN to a Draytek working?:

    Feb 24 18:02:48 charon 13[ENC] <13833> invalid ID_V1 payload length, decryption failed?
    Feb 24 18:02:48 charon 13[ENC] <13833> could not decrypt payloads
    Feb 24 18:02:48 charon 13[IKE] <13833> message parsing failed

    That looks like a shared key mismatch is most likely.
    https://docs.netgate.com/pfsense/en/latest/vpn/ipsec/ipsec-troubleshooting.html#phase-1-pre-shared-key-mismatch

    Steve



  • I've been working with Draytek support; Latest log/error at Draytek end is:
    2019-02-27 11:39:53 ## IKEv2 DBG : IKESA inR2 : Can't decrypt message
    2019-02-27 11:39:53 ## IKEv2 DBG : Missing payload : IKEv2_NP_v2SA+0x1848
    2019-02-27 11:39:53 ## IKEv2 DBG : Received IKEv2 Notify IKEv2_AUTHENTICATION_FAILED[24]
    2019-02-27 11:39:53 ## IKEv2 DBG : Recv IKEv2_AUTH[35] Reply from 81.143.205.132, Peer is IKEv2 Responder
    2019-02-27 11:39:53 ## IKEv2 DBG : Process Packet : #125 IKE SA Established, REPLACE after 19800 seconds

    Anyone know how to fix this please?



  • Apologies Stephenw10 - I hadn't clocked that you were in-house pfsense! Am very grateful for your assistance!



  • (The only change today is that we changed the connection to IKEv2 and DH gp2)



  • (and Draytek is set to Dial Out, always on)


  • Netgate Administrator

    I assume the Draytek logs are in reverse order again?

    Did you change to IKEv2 and DH group2 at both ends? pfSense will use IKEv2 if it is initiating and it's set to auto.

    The pfSense failure log will probably be more useful here, obviously we are far more familiar with it.

    However I would say it's most likely an identifier mismatch looking at those logs. IKEv2 has a much larger choice of identifier types. It looks like the Draytek has accepted whatever pfSense is sending as it's showing SA established but pfSene then sends an authentication failure message.

    Since you're using public IPs at both ends if the identifiers are still set to 'my IP' and 'peer IP' that should work.

    Steve



  • Yes both ends were changed, whilst I had the Draytek guy remoted into my Mac
    (The Draytek is set to dial out, not both, if that matters)

    Latest pfsense log entries are:
    Feb 27 16:23:01 charon 11[CFG] <30980> found matching ike config: 81.143.205.132...88.97.12.47 with prio 3100
    Feb 27 16:23:01 charon 11[IKE] <30980> 88.97.12.47 is initiating an IKE_SA
    Feb 27 16:23:01 charon 11[IKE] <30980> IKE_SA (unnamed)[30980] state change: CREATED => CONNECTING
    Feb 27 16:23:01 charon 11[CFG] <30980> selecting proposal:
    Feb 27 16:23:01 charon 11[CFG] <30980> proposal matches
    Feb 27 16:23:01 charon 11[CFG] <30980> received proposals: IKE:AES_CBC_256/HMAC_SHA1_96/PRF_HMAC_SHA1/MODP_1024
    Feb 27 16:23:01 charon 11[CFG] <30980> configured proposals: IKE:AES_CBC_256/HMAC_SHA1_96/PRF_HMAC_SHA1/MODP_1024
    Feb 27 16:23:01 charon 11[CFG] <30980> selected proposal: IKE:AES_CBC_256/HMAC_SHA1_96/PRF_HMAC_SHA1/MODP_1024
    Feb 27 16:23:01 charon 11[ENC] <30980> generating IKE_SA_INIT response 0 [ SA KE No N(NATD_S_IP) N(NATD_D_IP) N(MULT_AUTH) ]
    Feb 27 16:23:01 charon 11[NET] <30980> sending packet: from 81.143.205.132[500] to 88.97.12.47[500] (312 bytes)
    Feb 27 16:23:01 charon 11[NET] <30980> received packet: from 88.97.12.47[500] to 81.143.205.132[500] (204 bytes)
    Feb 27 16:23:01 charon 11[ENC] <30980> parsed IKE_AUTH request 1 [ IDi AUTH SA TSi TSr ]
    Feb 27 16:23:01 charon 11[CFG] <30980> looking for peer configs matching 81.143.205.132[%any]...88.97.12.47[88.97.12.47]
    Feb 27 16:23:01 charon 11[CFG] <30980> candidate "bypasslan", match: 1/1/24 (me/other/ike)
    Feb 27 16:23:01 charon 11[CFG] <30980> candidate "con3000", match: 1/20/3100 (me/other/ike)
    Feb 27 16:23:01 charon 11[CFG] <30980> ignore candidate 'bypasslan' without matching IKE proposal
    Feb 27 16:23:01 charon 11[CFG] <con3000|30980> selected peer config 'con3000'
    Feb 27 16:23:01 charon 11[IKE] <con3000|30980> tried 1 shared key for '%any' - '88.97.12.47', but MAC mismatched
    Feb 27 16:23:01 charon 11[ENC] <con3000|30980> generating IKE_AUTH response 1 [ N(AUTH_FAILED) ]
    Feb 27 16:23:01 charon 11[NET] <con3000|30980> sending packet: from 81.143.205.132[500] to 88.97.12.47[500] (76 bytes)
    Feb 27 16:23:01 charon 11[IKE] <con3000|30980> IKE_SA con3000[30980] state change: CONNECTING => DESTROYING



  • Here is the draytek end - there appears to be no peerID setting that end if that might be relevant?

    0_1551285133162_Screenshot 2019-02-27 16.31.29.png



  • The top and bottom of the previous screenshot:
    1_1551285228982_Screenshot 2019-02-27 16.32.57.png 0_1551285228982_Screenshot 2019-02-27 16.33.06.png


  • Netgate Administrator

    Ok so not an identifier mismatch, thay are sending their IP as identifier shown in [ ]

    looking for peer configs matching 81.143.205.132[%any]...88.97.12.47[88.97.12.47]
    

    It still looks like the preshared key is wrong:

    tried 1 shared key for '%any' - '88.97.12.47', but MAC mismatched
    

    I would test it by using a super simple key that cannot me typo'd or translated like 12345. Move to a better key once it connects with that.

    We can't see the actual encryption settings there, I assume they are under that advanced button. If the HMAC didn't match there I would expect it to fail with a proposal error. It was matching previously for IKEv1 but worth checking.

    Steve


  • Netgate Administrator

    Are you using an especially long PreSharedKey? The maximum ley length is related to auth hash used and you are using SHA1 which limits it to 64B (I think).

    Steve



  • Changed PSK to 12345, saved and applied at both ends

    Draytek syslog (latest at top):
    2019-02-27 17:41:02 ## IKEv2 DBG : INFORMATIONAL OUT : Sending IKEv2 Delete IKE SA request, deleting #3373
    2019-02-27 17:41:02 [IPSEC][L2L][6:PFsense][@81.143.205.132] IKE link timeout: state linking
    2019-02-27 17:40:54 IKE <==, Next Payload=ISAKMP_NEXT_HASH, Exchange Type = 0x5, Message ID = 0x12ad535f
    2019-02-27 17:40:54 IKE ==>, Next Payload=ISAKMP_NEXT_HASH, Exchange Type = 0x5, Message ID = 0x77b5b4a4
    2019-02-27 17:40:54 IKE <==, Next Payload=ISAKMP_NEXT_HASH, Exchange Type = 0x5, Message ID = 0x3977f965
    2019-02-27 17:40:54 IKE ==>, Next Payload=ISAKMP_NEXT_HASH, Exchange Type = 0x5, Message ID = 0x371c750d
    2019-02-27 17:40:49 ## IKEv2 DBG : IKESA inR2 : Can't decrypt message
    2019-02-27 17:40:49 ## IKEv2 DBG : Missing payload : IKEv2_NP_v2SA+0x1848
    2019-02-27 17:40:49 ## IKEv2 DBG : Received IKEv2 Notify IKEv2_AUTHENTICATION_FAILED[24]
    2019-02-27 17:40:49 ## IKEv2 DBG : Recv IKEv2_AUTH[35] Reply from 81.143.205.132, Peer is IKEv2 Responder
    2019-02-27 17:40:49 ## IKEv2 DBG : Process Packet : #3373 IKE SA Established, REPLACE after 21150 seconds
    2019-02-27 17:40:49 ## IKEv2 DBG : IKESA inR1_outI2 : Create Child SA #3374, IKE SA is #3373
    2019-02-27 17:40:49 ## IKEv2 DBG : IKESA inR1_outI2 : Receive Notify [16404], ignore it
    2019-02-27 17:40:49 ## IKEv2 DBG : IKESA inR1_outI2 : Receive Notify IKEv2_NAT_DETECTION_DESTINATION_IP[16389]
    2019-02-27 17:40:49 ## IKEv2 DBG : IKESA inR1_outI2 : Receive Notify IKEv2_NAT_DETECTION_SOURCE_IP[16388]
    2019-02-27 17:40:49 ## IKEv2 DBG : Received IKEv2 Notify [16404]
    2019-02-27 17:40:49 ## IKEv2 DBG : Received IKEv2 Notify IKEv2_NAT_DETECTION_DESTINATION_IP[16389]
    2019-02-27 17:40:49 ## IKEv2 DBG : Received IKEv2 Notify IKEv2_NAT_DETECTION_SOURCE_IP[16388]
    2019-02-27 17:40:49 ## IKEv2 DBG : Recv IKEv2_SA_INIT[34] Reply from 81.143.205.132, Peer is IKEv2 Responder
    2019-02-27 17:40:49 ## IKEv2 DBG : IKESA outI1 : Create IKE SA #3373 Profile Index 0
    2019-02-27 17:40:49 Dialing Node6 (PFsense) : 81.143.205.132
    2019-02-27 17:40:46 ## IKEv2 DBG : INFORMATIONAL OUT : Sending IKEv2 Delete IKE SA request, deleting #3371
    2019-02-27 17:40:46 [IPSEC][L2L][6:PFsense][@81.143.205.132] IKE link timeout: state linking
    2019-02-27 17:40:33 ## IKEv2 DBG : IKESA inR2 : Can't decrypt message
    2019-02-27 17:40:33 ## IKEv2 DBG : Missing payload : IKEv2_NP_v2SA+0x1848
    2019-02-27 17:40:33 ## IKEv2 DBG : Received IKEv2 Notify IKEv2_AUTHENTICATION_FAILED[24]
    2019-02-27 17:40:33 ## IKEv2 DBG : Recv IKEv2_AUTH[35] Reply from 81.143.205.132, Peer is IKEv2 Responder
    2019-02-27 17:40:33 ## IKEv2 DBG : Process Packet : #3371 IKE SA Established, REPLACE after 21572 seconds
    2019-02-27 17:40:33 ## IKEv2 DBG : IKESA inR1_outI2 : Create Child SA #3372, IKE SA is #3371

    pfSense log:
    Feb 27 17:42:27 charon 15[CFG] <31333> looking for an IKEv2 config for 81.143.205.132...88.97.12.47
    Feb 27 17:42:27 charon 15[CFG] <31333> candidate: %any...%any, prio 24
    Feb 27 17:42:27 charon 15[CFG] <31333> candidate: 81.143.205.132...88.97.12.47, prio 3100
    Feb 27 17:42:27 charon 15[CFG] <31333> found matching ike config: 81.143.205.132...88.97.12.47 with prio 3100
    Feb 27 17:42:27 charon 15[IKE] <31333> 88.97.12.47 is initiating an IKE_SA
    Feb 27 17:42:27 charon 15[IKE] <31333> IKE_SA (unnamed)[31333] state change: CREATED => CONNECTING
    Feb 27 17:42:27 charon 15[CFG] <31333> selecting proposal:
    Feb 27 17:42:27 charon 15[CFG] <31333> proposal matches
    Feb 27 17:42:27 charon 15[CFG] <31333> received proposals: IKE:AES_CBC_256/HMAC_SHA1_96/PRF_HMAC_SHA1/MODP_1024
    Feb 27 17:42:27 charon 15[CFG] <31333> configured proposals: IKE:AES_CBC_256/HMAC_SHA1_96/PRF_HMAC_SHA1/MODP_1024
    Feb 27 17:42:27 charon 15[CFG] <31333> selected proposal: IKE:AES_CBC_256/HMAC_SHA1_96/PRF_HMAC_SHA1/MODP_1024
    Feb 27 17:42:27 charon 15[ENC] <31333> generating IKE_SA_INIT response 0 [ SA KE No N(NATD_S_IP) N(NATD_D_IP) N(MULT_AUTH) ]
    Feb 27 17:42:27 charon 15[NET] <31333> sending packet: from 81.143.205.132[500] to 88.97.12.47[500] (312 bytes)
    Feb 27 17:42:27 charon 15[NET] <31333> received packet: from 88.97.12.47[500] to 81.143.205.132[500] (204 bytes)
    Feb 27 17:42:27 charon 15[ENC] <31333> parsed IKE_AUTH request 1 [ IDi AUTH SA TSi TSr ]
    Feb 27 17:42:27 charon 15[CFG] <31333> looking for peer configs matching 81.143.205.132[%any]...88.97.12.47[88.97.12.47]
    Feb 27 17:42:27 charon 15[CFG] <31333> candidate "bypasslan", match: 1/1/24 (me/other/ike)
    Feb 27 17:42:27 charon 15[CFG] <31333> candidate "con3000", match: 1/20/3100 (me/other/ike)
    Feb 27 17:42:27 charon 15[CFG] <31333> ignore candidate 'bypasslan' without matching IKE proposal
    Feb 27 17:42:27 charon 15[CFG] <con3000|31333> selected peer config 'con3000'
    Feb 27 17:42:27 charon 15[IKE] <con3000|31333> tried 1 shared key for '%any' - '88.97.12.47', but MAC mismatched
    Feb 27 17:42:27 charon 15[ENC] <con3000|31333> generating IKE_AUTH response 1 [ N(AUTH_FAILED) ]
    Feb 27 17:42:27 charon 15[NET] <con3000|31333> sending packet: from 81.143.205.132[500] to 88.97.12.47[500] (76 bytes)
    Feb 27 17:42:27 charon 15[IKE] <con3000|31333> IKE_SA con3000[31333] state change: CONNECTING => DESTROYING
    Feb 27 17:42:43 charon 15[NET] <31334> received packet: from 88.97.12.47[500] to 81.143.205.132[500] (288 bytes)
    Feb 27 17:42:43 charon 15[ENC] <31334> parsed IKE_SA_INIT request 0 [ SA KE No N(NATD_S_IP) N(NATD_D_IP) ]
    Feb 27 17:42:43 charon 15[CFG] <31334> looking for an IKEv2 config for 81.143.205.132...88.97.12.47
    Feb 27 17:42:43 charon 15[CFG] <31334> candidate: %any...%any, prio 24
    Feb 27 17:42:43 charon 15[CFG] <31334> candidate: 81.143.205.132...88.97.12.47, prio 3100
    Feb 27 17:42:43 charon 15[CFG] <31334> found matching ike config: 81.143.205.132...88.97.12.47 with prio 3100
    Feb 27 17:42:43 charon 15[IKE] <31334> 88.97.12.47 is initiating an IKE_SA
    Feb 27 17:42:43 charon 15[IKE] <31334> IKE_SA (unnamed)[31334] state change: CREATED => CONNECTING
    Feb 27 17:42:43 charon 15[CFG] <31334> selecting proposal:
    Feb 27 17:42:43 charon 15[CFG] <31334> proposal matches
    Feb 27 17:42:43 charon 15[CFG] <31334> received proposals: IKE:AES_CBC_256/HMAC_SHA1_96/PRF_HMAC_SHA1/MODP_1024
    Feb 27 17:42:43 charon 15[CFG] <31334> configured proposals: IKE:AES_CBC_256/HMAC_SHA1_96/PRF_HMAC_SHA1/MODP_1024
    Feb 27 17:42:43 charon 15[CFG] <31334> selected proposal: IKE:AES_CBC_256/HMAC_SHA1_96/PRF_HMAC_SHA1/MODP_1024
    Feb 27 17:42:43 charon 15[ENC] <31334> generating IKE_SA_INIT response 0 [ SA KE No N(NATD_S_IP) N(NATD_D_IP) N(MULT_AUTH) ]
    Feb 27 17:42:43 charon 15[NET] <31334> sending packet: from 81.143.205.132[500] to 88.97.12.47[500] (312 bytes)
    Feb 27 17:42:43 charon 15[NET] <31334> received packet: from 88.97.12.47[500] to 81.143.205.132[500] (204 bytes)
    Feb 27 17:42:43 charon 15[ENC] <31334> parsed IKE_AUTH request 1 [ IDi AUTH SA TSi TSr ]
    Feb 27 17:42:43 charon 15[CFG] <31334> looking for peer configs matching 81.143.205.132[%any]...88.97.12.47[88.97.12.47]
    Feb 27 17:42:43 charon 15[CFG] <31334> candidate "bypasslan", match: 1/1/24 (me/other/ike)
    Feb 27 17:42:43 charon 15[CFG] <31334> candidate "con3000", match: 1/20/3100 (me/other/ike)
    Feb 27 17:42:43 charon 15[CFG] <31334> ignore candidate 'bypasslan' without matching IKE proposal
    Feb 27 17:42:43 charon 15[CFG] <con3000|31334> selected peer config 'con3000'
    Feb 27 17:42:43 charon 15[IKE] <con3000|31334> tried 1 shared key for '%any' - '88.97.12.47', but MAC mismatched
    Feb 27 17:42:43 charon 15[ENC] <con3000|31334> generating IKE_AUTH response 1 [ N(AUTH_FAILED) ]
    Feb 27 17:42:43 charon 15[NET] <con3000|31334> sending packet: from 81.143.205.132[500] to 88.97.12.47[500] (76 bytes)
    Feb 27 17:42:43 charon 15[IKE] <con3000|31334> IKE_SA con3000[31334] state change: CONNECTING => DESTROYING



  • Sorry - missed your key length Q; no - previous psk was testtest - the last logs were 12345


  • Netgate Administrator

    Hmm, curious.

    Is this the only tunnel at each end?

    Does either end have more than one WAN?

    Can we see the config at the pfSense end?

    Steve


  • Netgate Administrator

    @orangehand said in Has anyone got a VPN to a Draytek working?:

    looking for peer configs matching 81.143.205.132[%any]...88.97.12.47[88.97.12.47]

    Ok in fact this could be an identifier issue. It looks like the Draytek is sending 'any' as the identifier for pfSense. What is it actually set to in pfSense?

    I don't see a place to specify a peer ID in the Draytek settings other than the 'dial-in' section but you might try adding it there.

    Steve



  • 1_1551337595626_Screenshot 2019-02-28 07.04.40.png 0_1551337595623_Screenshot 2019-02-28 07.03.07.png



  • In dial in settings you mean the username field? What would I put there please?


  • Netgate Administrator

    Ok the Draytek is sending it's own IP as an identifier but 'any' for the pfSense end. So in pfSense it should be the opposite; 'any' for My Identifier and 'peer IP' for Peer Identifier.

    But better would be to set an Identifier in the Draytek. The only place in the screenshot I see to do that is the 'Peer ID' filed in the dial-in settings. Try that. See if it changes what is shown in the pfSense logs. You want it to show:
    looking for peer configs matching 81.143.205.132[81.143.205.132]...88.97.12.47[88.97.12.47]

    Then set My IP and Peer IP as the identifiers in pfSense to match.

    Steve



  • That worked, many many thanks Steve


  • Netgate Administrator

    Ah, great. Were you able to get the Draytek to send an IP as identifier or did you have to stick with 'any' as the local identifier in pfSense?

    Steve



  • pfSense (my) end I used My identifier: My IP Address and Peer Identifier: Peer IP address
    Would you like full screenshots for reference?


  • Netgate Administrator

    Yes please. Might be helpful for someone else in the future.

    Steve



  • 4_1551808765601_pfSense IPSec to Draytek 2860 P2.png 3_1551808765601_Draytek 2860 IPSec to pfSense-1.png 2_1551808765600_Draytek 2860 IPSec to pfSense-2.png 1_1551808765600_Draytek 2860 IPSec to pfSense-adv.png 0_1551808765600_pfSense IPSec to Draytek 2860 P1.png


Log in to reply