Ipsec Configuration not Working!
-
Hello all,
Hope you all are doing well,
While I am waiting to received my "NETGATE 6100 MAX SECURITY GATEWAY WITH PFSENSE+" I wanted to test S2S --> VPN/IPSec however I am not able to establish the connection between 2 sites while I have all matched and having all Prerequisites. For more info. see the attached photo when I try to connect one side is missing "Local ID" and "Remote ID" while the other is able to gather all the infmations!
Thanks a lot for any help :)
-
@ibnkamala Version of pfSense is helpful here. As well as any logs that appear (click the icon on the status screen that looks like a ledger).
-
@rcoleman-netgate Thanks for your reply, That's true I am having to different versions.
This is from the side which is not able to get the local and remote IDs.Some logs from this side :
Jun 7 21:24:33 charon 13[NET] <con2000|112> sending packet: from 10.10.0.5[500] to remote-public-ip[500] (304 bytes)
Jun 7 21:24:33 charon 13[IKE] <con2000|112> retransmit 3 of request with message ID 0
Jun 7 21:24:32 charon 13[NET] <con1000|55> sending packet: from 10.10.0.5[4500] to ignore-this-please[4500] (80 bytes)
Jun 7 21:24:32 charon 13[ENC] <con1000|55> generating INFORMATIONAL response 5624 [ ]
Jun 7 21:24:32 charon 13[ENC] <con1000|55> parsed INFORMATIONAL request 5624 [ ]
Jun 7 21:24:32 charon 13[NET] <con1000|55> received packet: from ignore-this-please[4500] to 10.10.0.5[4500] (80 bytes)
Jun 7 21:24:29 charon 13[CFG] vici client 9893 disconnected
Jun 7 21:24:29 charon 13[CFG] vici client 9893 requests: list-sas
Jun 7 21:24:29 charon 06[CFG] vici client 9893 registered for: list-sa
Jun 7 21:24:29 charon 14[CFG] vici client 9893 connected
Jun 7 21:24:29 charon 06[CFG] ignoring acquire, connection attempt pending
Jun 7 21:24:29 charon 14[KNL] creating acquire job for policy 10.10.0.5/32|/0 === remote-public-ip/32|/0 with reqid {2}
Jun 7 21:24:27 charon 14[NET] <con1000|55> sending packet: from 10.10.0.5[4500] to ignore-this-please[4500] (80 bytes)
Jun 7 21:24:27 charon 14[ENC] <con1000|55> generating INFORMATIONAL response 5623 [ ]
Jun 7 21:24:27 charon 14[ENC] <con1000|55> parsed INFORMATIONAL request 5623 [ ]
Jun 7 21:24:27 charon 14[NET] <con1000|55> received packet: from ignore-this-please [4500] to 10.10.0.5[4500] (80 bytes)
Jun 7 21:24:24 charon 14[CFG] vici client 9892 disconnected
Jun 7 21:24:24 charon 06[CFG] vici client 9892 requests: list-sas
Jun 7 21:24:24 charon 10[CFG] vici client 9892 registered for: list-sa
Jun 7 21:24:24 charon 14[CFG] vici client 9892 connected
Jun 7 21:24:22 charon 10[CFG] ignoring acquire, connection attempt pending
Jun 7 21:24:22 charon 14[KNL] creating acquire job for policy 10.10.0.5/32|/0 === remote-public-ip/32|/0 with reqid {2}
Jun 7 21:24:22 charon 14[NET] <con1000|55> sending packet: from 10.10.0.5[4500] to ignore-this-please [4500] (80 bytes)
Jun 7 21:24:22 charon 14[ENC] <con1000|55> generating INFORMATIONAL response 5622 [ ]
Jun 7 21:24:22 charon 14[ENC] <con1000|55> parsed INFORMATIONAL request 5622 [ ]
Jun 7 21:24:22 charon 14[NET] <con1000|55> received packet: from ignore-this-please [4500] to 10.10.0.5[4500] (80 bytes) -
@rcoleman-netgate and this is the other side's version
And some logs:
Jun 7 18:55:06
charon
38100
11[CFG] vici client 825 connected
Jun 7 18:55:06
charon
38100
14[CFG] vici client 825 registered for: list-sa
Jun 7 18:55:06
charon
38100
14[CFG] vici client 825 requests: list-sas
Jun 7 18:55:06
charon
38100
11[CFG] vici client 825 disconnected
Jun 7 18:55:08
charon
38100
15[IKE] <con1|6> retransmit 3 of request with message ID 0
Jun 7 18:55:08
charon
38100
15[NET] <con1|6> sending packet: from 192.168.1.27[500] to remote-public-ip[500] (304 bytes)
Jun 7 18:55:12
charon
38100
15[CFG] vici client 826 connected
-
@rcoleman-netgate since I am not very strong on how to read the logs and understand what is wrong, could you please help me on that?
concerning the version is that mean I must have same version on both sides?
-
This post is deleted! -
Anyone can help me please, I am 100% sure that use in both sides IKEv2, simplest PSK which is "123" and everything is matched but still I am not able to establish the connection?!!!
Jun 10 11:57:55 charon 08[IKE] <con2000|146> IKE_SA con2000[146] state change: CONNECTING => DESTROYING
Jun 10 11:57:55 charon 08[CHD] <con2000|146> CHILD_SA con2000{165} state change: CREATED => DESTROYING
Jun 10 11:57:55 charon 08[IKE] <con2000|146> received AUTHENTICATION_FAILED notify error
Jun 10 11:57:55 charon 08[ENC] <con2000|146> parsed IKE_AUTH response 1 [ N(AUTH_FAILED) ]Any help would be really appreciated :)
-
@ibnkamala I don't have direct advice for you but note 2.6 made several changes to IPSec, did you review those?
Possibly, upgrade the 2.4.5 which is a few versions old?
-
Would be super helpful if you would show screenshots of the P1 and P2 settings for both sides. And while you’re at it, update the 2.4.5 box. Not really interested in trying to troubleshoot an unsupported version of pfsense.
-
@gabacho4 thanks for your reply I am going to share both sites configurations and here is the screenshot when I try to connect the tunnel.
Thanks for your help, for sure I am going to update to a newer version but I wanted to test it first.
-
@ibnkamala those are not the p1 and p2 settings. What you’ve sent is a screenshot of the ipsec status. It tells me nothing other than the fact that your IPSec connection isn’t working which has already been established by your other posts. Please send screenshots of the actual p1 and p2 configurations for both sides of the tunnel. Those are what you configured when you went to VPN - IPSec and then created the p1 and p2.
-
-
@ibnkamala you’re killing me bro. And what about side B?! I need both sides to compare. Come on.
-
here are phase 1 and 2 configs for siteB:
Phase 1:
Phase 2
Thanks a lot for your help
-
@ibnkamala ok so one side is behind NAT if I recall right. Try this. For the “my identifier” and “peer identifier” change from IP address to KeyID tag for both. Then make the id for the local router “SideA” and the remote “SideB”. On the remote side make the my identifier “SideB” and the peer identifier “SideA”. Be sure to change the other side to use KeyID tag as well of course.
-
@gabacho4 both sides are behind the NAT
-
@ibnkamala ok. Make those changes. Also you’re positive that the routers in front of the pfsense boxes allows IPSec pass through?
-
@gabacho4 in both side routers IPsec is allowed to pass through,
Could you please tell me, what do you mean by "Then make the id for the local router “SideA” and the remote “SideB""?I really appreciate you great help
-
Also, just to emphasize, you really need to update the other side to pfsense 2.6.0. The IPSec settings and configuration between 2.4.5 and 2.6 have changed. It’s possible this will never work until you update.
-
@ibnkamala said in Ipsec Configuration not Working!:
@gabacho4 in both side routers IPsec is allowed to pass through,
Could you please tell me, what do you mean by "Then make the id for the local router “SideA” and the remote “SideB""?I really appreciate you great help
Under:
Phase 1 Proposal (Authentication) - change My Identifier to KeyID tag from My IP Address. Also change the Peer identifier to KeyID. Make My identifier KeyID tag value SiteA and peer identifier KeyID tag value SiteB. Then do the same thing on the other router except the My identifier will be SiteB and the peer will be SiteA
