Guest User!

You are not Sophos Staff.

Thread Info
  • State Not Answered
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 13 replies
  • Subscribers 1 subscriber
  • Views 4674 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
Suggested
This discussion has been locked.
You can no longer post new replies to this discussion. If you have a question you can start a new discussion

Establishing remote access VPN

ColinB
Hi All,
I'm trying to set up remote access VPN to my home LAN which is protected by an Astaro UTM 9.x gateway. I'm wanting to use L2TP over IPsec but can't get the link to establish through my external NIC. Using the same settings (except to change the VPN to 'internal interface') I can establish a stable VPN via the LAN side of the gateway. I've tried disabling as amny security feature as I can think of and have set up a rule for allow 'anything to anywhere' but it's got me beat!
I've copied in the VPN logs in the hope that it means something to someone...
Thanks,
Colin

(PS - sorry this will look like War & Peace)

External interface (WAN) – can’t establish VPN

CandCB pluto[21248]: loading secrets from "/etc/ipsec.secrets" 
CandCB pluto[21248]: loaded PSK secret for 88.104.166.168 %any 
CandCB pluto[21248]: forgetting secrets 
CandCB pluto[21248]: loading secrets from "/etc/ipsec.secrets" 
CandCB pluto[21248]: loaded PSK secret for 88.104.166.168 %any 
CandCB pluto[21248]: loading ca certificates from '/etc/ipsec.d/cacerts' 
CandCB pluto[21248]: loaded ca certificate from '/etc/ipsec.d/cacerts/VPN Signing CA.pem' 
CandCB pluto[21248]: loading aa certificates from '/etc/ipsec.d/aacerts' 
CandCB pluto[21248]: loading ocsp certificates from '/etc/ipsec.d/ocspcerts' 
CandCB pluto[21248]: loading attribute certificates from '/etc/ipsec.d/acerts' 
CandCB pluto[21248]: Changing to directory '/etc/ipsec.d/crls' 
CandCB pluto[21248]: "S_for RemoteUser": deleting connection 
CandCB pluto[21248]: "S_for RemoteUser": deleting connection 
CandCB pluto[21248]: added connection description "S_for RemoteUser" 
CandCB pluto[21248]: added connection description "S_for RemoteUser" 
CandCB pluto[21248]: packet from 88.104.166.254:500: received Vendor ID payload [MS NT5 ISAKMPOAKLEY 00000004] 
CandCB pluto[21248]: packet from 88.104.166.254:500: ignoring Vendor ID payload [FRAGMENTATION] 
CandCB pluto[21248]: packet from 88.104.166.254:500: received Vendor ID payload [draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-02_n] 
CandCB pluto[21248]: packet from 88.104.166.254:500: ignoring Vendor ID payload [Vid-Initial-Contact] 
CandCB pluto[21248]: "S_for RemoteUser"[1] 88.104.166.254 #67: responding to Main Mode from unknown peer 88.104.166.254 
CandCB pluto[21248]: packet from 88.104.166.254:500: received Vendor ID payload [MS NT5 ISAKMPOAKLEY 00000004] 
CandCB pluto[21248]: packet from 88.104.166.254:500: ignoring Vendor ID payload [FRAGMENTATION] 
CandCB pluto[21248]: packet from 88.104.166.254:500: received Vendor ID payload [draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-02_n] 
CandCB pluto[21248]: packet from 88.104.166.254:500: ignoring Vendor ID payload [Vid-Initial-Contact] 
CandCB pluto[21248]: "S_for RemoteUser"[1] 88.104.166.254 #68: responding to Main Mode from unknown peer 88.104.166.254 
CandCB pluto[21248]: packet from 88.104.166.254:500: received Vendor ID payload [MS NT5 ISAKMPOAKLEY 00000004] 
CandCB pluto[21248]: packet from 88.104.166.254:500: ignoring Vendor ID payload [FRAGMENTATION] 
CandCB pluto[21248]: packet from 88.104.166.254:500: received Vendor ID payload [draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-02_n] 
CandCB pluto[21248]: packet from 88.104.166.254:500: ignoring Vendor ID payload [Vid-Initial-Contact] 
CandCB pluto[21248]: "S_for RemoteUser"[1] 88.104.166.254 #69: responding to Main Mode from unknown peer 88.104.166.254 
CandCB pluto[21248]: packet from 88.104.166.254:500: received Vendor ID payload [MS NT5 ISAKMPOAKLEY 00000004] 
CandCB pluto[21248]: packet from 88.104.166.254:500: ignoring Vendor ID payload [FRAGMENTATION] 
CandCB pluto[21248]: packet from 88.104.166.254:500: received Vendor ID payload [draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-02_n] 
CandCB pluto[21248]: packet from 88.104.166.254:500: ignoring Vendor ID payload [Vid-Initial-Contact] 
CandCB pluto[21248]: "S_for RemoteUser"[1] 88.104.166.254 #70: responding to Main Mode from unknown peer 88.104.166.254 
CandCB pluto[21248]: packet from 88.104.166.254:500: received Vendor ID payload [MS NT5 ISAKMPOAKLEY 00000004] 
CandCB pluto[21248]: packet from 88.104.166.254:500: ignoring Vendor ID payload [FRAGMENTATION] 
CandCB pluto[21248]: packet from 88.104.166.254:500: received Vendor ID payload [draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-02_n] 
CandCB pluto[21248]: packet from 88.104.166.254:500: ignoring Vendor ID payload [Vid-Initial-Contact] 
CandCB pluto[21248]: "S_for RemoteUser"[1] 88.104.166.254 #71: responding to Main Mode from unknown peer 88.104.166.254 
CandCB pluto[21248]: packet from 88.104.166.254:500: received Vendor ID payload [MS NT5 ISAKMPOAKLEY 00000004] 
CandCB pluto[21248]: packet from 88.104.166.254:500: ignoring Vendor ID payload [FRAGMENTATION] 
CandCB pluto[21248]: packet from 88.104.166.254:500: received Vendor ID payload [draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-02_n] 
CandCB pluto[21248]: packet from 88.104.166.254:500: ignoring Vendor ID payload [Vid-Initial-Contact] 
2012:12:06-19:35:15 CandCB pluto[21248]: "S_for RemoteUser"[1] 88.104.166.254 #72: responding to Main Mode from unknown peer 88.104.166.254 
2012:12:06-19:35:22 CandCB pluto[21248]: packet from 88.104.166.254:500: ignoring Delete SA payload: not encrypted 

Internal interface – VPN works fine
CandCB pluto[21248]: packet from 192.168.0.99:500: received Vendor ID payload [MS NT5 ISAKMPOAKLEY 00000004] 
CandCB pluto[21248]: packet from 192.168.0.99:500: ignoring Vendor ID payload [FRAGMENTATION] 
CandCB pluto[21248]: packet from 192.168.0.99:500: received Vendor ID payload [draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-02_n] 
CandCB pluto[21248]: packet from 192.168.0.99:500: ignoring Vendor ID payload [Vid-Initial-Contact] 
CandCB pluto[21248]: "S_for RemoteUser"[1] 192.168.0.99 #73: responding to Main Mode from unknown peer 192.168.0.99 
CandCB pluto[21248]: "S_for RemoteUser"[1] 192.168.0.99 #73: NAT-Traversal: Result using draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-02/03: no NAT detected 
CandCB pluto[21248]: "S_for RemoteUser"[1] 192.168.0.99 #73: Peer ID is ID_IPV4_ADDR: '192.168.0.99' 
CandCB pluto[21248]: "S_for RemoteUser"[1] 192.168.0.99 #73: sent MR3, ISAKMP SA established 
CandCB pluto[21248]: "S_for RemoteUser"[1] 192.168.0.99 #74: responding to Quick Mode 
CandCB pluto[21248]: "S_for RemoteUser"[1] 192.168.0.99 #74: IPsec SA established {ESP=>0x4a5b7498  WAITCTLCONN 
CandCB openl2tpd[25731]: PROTO: tunl 11823: SCCCN received from peer 1 
CandCB openl2tpd[25731]: FSM: CCE(11823) event SCCCN_ACCEPT in state WAITCTLCONN 
CandCB openl2tpd[25731]: FUNC: tunl 11823 up 
CandCB openl2tpd[25731]: FSM: CCE(11823) state change: WAITCTLCONN --> ESTABLISHED 
CandCB openl2tpd[25731]: PROTO: tunl 11823/0: ICRQ received from peer 1 
CandCB openl2tpd[25731]: PROTO: tunl 11823/19360: sending ICRP to peer 1/1 
CandCB openl2tpd[25731]: PROTO: tunl 11823/19360: ICCN received from peer 1 
CandCB pppd-l2tp[5852]: Plugin aua.so loaded. 
CandCB pppd-l2tp[5852]: AUA plugin initialized. 
CandCB pppd-l2tp[5852]: Plugin ippool.so loaded. 
CandCB pppd-l2tp[5852]: Plugin pppol2tp.so loaded. 
CandCB pppd-l2tp[5852]: pppd 2.4.5 started by (unknown), uid 0 
CandCB pppd-l2tp[5852]: using channel 23 
CandCB pppd-l2tp[5852]: Using interface ppp1 
CandCB pppd-l2tp[5852]: Connect: ppp1  
CandCB pppd-l2tp[5852]: Overriding mtu 1500 to 1380 
CandCB pppd-l2tp[5852]: PPPoL2TP options: lnsmode tid 11823 sid 19360 debugmask 0 
CandCB pppd-l2tp[5852]: Overriding mru 1500 to mtu value 1380 
CandCB pppd-l2tp[5852]: sent [LCP ConfReq id=0x1    ]


This thread was automatically locked due to age.
Parents Reply Children
  • 0 in reply to BAlfson
    Hi Bob,

    Don't know why the interface reset to 0.0.0.0 but suspect it could have been whilst I was logged into the Vigor modem. Anyway, by the time I'd read your post it had reverted back to a real IP. I've tried to establish a VPN via the internet today but it failed again.

    Whilst having a trawl of the web, I found that the MTU value on the external interface was higher than my ISP recommends (1492 Vs 1432). I've reduced it to the recommended but, at least from inside my home, it doesn't seem to have made any difference.

    Any suggestions?
    Thanks,
    Colin