OpenVPN doesn't return subnet mask correctly

phil.davis · Jun 29, 2013, 7:41 AM

So that means I have to create individual item for each subnet? How about if I have many VLANs, for example, 10.10.8.0/28, 10.10.8.16/28, 10.10.8.32/28… then I create one local network as 10.10.8.0/24, which covers all the VLANs under 8 section, does it work?

Jeff

Yes, if networks you want to be reachable can all aggregate like this into a single network, then you can specify a single aggregated network as "Local Network". All it does is make a route to whatever you put.
Note: In 2.1-RC you can put a list of networks in "Local Network" and "Remote Network", so you can specify multiple disjoint networks without using the advanced box.

jeffwji · Jul 1, 2013, 6:42 PM

Sounds great! thanks for every one!

jeffwji · Jul 5, 2013, 3:52 PM

Hi Guys

I'm back!

I upgraded my little virtual network so that it looks be more secure. Now the draft is:

|–------------------NEW ADDED---------------------------|
|--Test outter network --||---------- External firewall----------||--------DMZ--------||--------Internal firewall--------||---Internal network
[192.168.x.x] –--->[ WAN:192.168.137.36||LAN:10.10.1.1 ] <–-10.10.0.0/21---> [ DMZ:10.10.1.2||LAN:10.10.8.1 ]<–---10.10.8.0/21
<----------------------- NAT------------------------------->|-OpenVPN(10.10.9.1/24)

Yes, I added an external firewall in front of the old one. Mapped the OpenVPN to the world, and keep every thing on the old firewall as before(except change the name to internal firewall). As what we did, the VPN user is still able to access the now called "internal network"(10.10.8.0/21) via NAT, and I also set a static route on the new external firewall to make the DMZ(10.10.0.0/21) is able to access to 10.10.8.0/21. Now every thing works fine, but the VPN user can't access DMZ. How can I make it works? The current local network for VPN is 10.10.8.0/21, do I have to change it to 10.10.0.0/21? if so, will it lost the accessibility to 8.0/21?

Jeff

marvosa · Jul 5, 2013, 4:34 PM

You will need to add a route to it via the advanced config field… has this been done?

Also, which DMZ are you trying to access? Because you have your DMZ's in the same subnet on both firewalls.

jeffwji · Jul 5, 2013, 5:23 PM

Right, when I added push "route 10.10.0.0 255.255.248.0" to the advanced, I'm able to access DMZ now. There's only one DMZ, why you think I have two?

And I also have to add push "route 10.10.8.0 255.255.255.0" to advanced, even though the local network has the same value, otherwise I'll be blocked by 10.10.8.0 section. (Advanced config overrides the local network instead of add-on?)

And also If I put in "10.10.8.0 255.255.248.0", I purposed to be able to access 8.0 to 16.255, but failed. Is it because it covers the VPN subnet?

phil.davis · Jul 6, 2013, 10:03 AM

The advanced config adds to the other settings - you can put 1 network in the Local Network field, and others in the advanced box with push route statements.

And also If I put in "10.10.8.0 255.255.248.0", I purposed to be able to access 8.0 to 16.255, but failed. Is it because it covers the VPN subnet?

"10.10.8.0 255.255.248.0" is 10.10.8.0 to 10.10.15.255 - but you do not need that in the advanced section if you already have 10.10.8.0/21 in Local Network.
Actually you can put whatever aggregated network you like in the Local Network or Remote Network boxes - 10.10.0.0/20 will cover 10.10.0.0 to 10.10.15.255 in one go.

marvosa · Jul 8, 2013, 6:25 PM

Sorry, from your diagram it looks like you have DMZ's on both firewalls.

Yes, adding push "route 10.10.8.0 255.255.255.0" to your advanced config when it's already in your Local Network field is redundant and can be removed. If you look at your config, you'll see the duplicate entry.