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

Multiple IPSEC Customers with the same LAN subnet

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved IPsec
3 Posts 2 Posters 571 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.
  • I
    ironmonkey
    last edited by Jan 21, 2022, 10:59 PM

    Hello,

    I have a pfSense 21.05 running IPSEC in an AWS VPC. It is in a single routing domain and set up as a VPN Hub. It is used to connect my VPC to multiple 3rd party locations via IPSEC. It is only used to source traffic from my VPC TO the client's LAN. However I have two customers using the same remote subnet. Is there anything on pfSense that would allow me to connect to two different remote locations that use the same subnet? NAT/BiNAT within the P2 setup doesn't seem to address this particular scenario.

    MyVPC (10.10.1.0/24) -> My pfSense -> ipsec -> Customer#1 (10.10.200.0/24)
    MyVPC (10.10.1.0/24) -> My pfSense -> ipsec -> Customer#2 (10.10.200.0/24)

    P.S - I did try multiple searches prior to submitting this post. I wasn't able to find anything specific about routing TO multiple remote sites sharing the same network space.

    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
    • J
      jimp Rebel Alliance Developer Netgate
      last edited by Jan 24, 2022, 2:23 PM

      No, the remote system must perform the NAT in this case. Your side must see distinct networks for each tunnel.

      Remember: Upvote with the 👍 button for any user/post you find to be helpful, informative, or deserving of recognition!

      Need help fast? Netgate Global Support!

      Do not Chat/PM for help!

      I 1 Reply Last reply Jan 24, 2022, 5:01 PM Reply Quote 0
      • I
        ironmonkey @jimp
        last edited by Jan 24, 2022, 5:01 PM

        @jimp
        Ok, thank you for the response. That does make sense to me as well but I wanted to check just in case.
        Thanks!

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        3 out of 3
        • First post
          3/3
          Last post
        Copyright 2025 Rubicon Communications LLC (Netgate). All rights reserved.
          This community forum collects and processes your personal information.
          consent.not_received