Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 09:06:03 +0200 From: peter.blok@bsd4all.org To: Julian Elischer <julian@freebsd.org>, "Andrey V. Elsukov" <bu7cher@yandex.ru> Cc: Victor Gamov <vit@otcnet.ru>, freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: multiple if_ipsec Message-ID: <15DBFD1E-BC64-4A10-9CE1-E9912544B17C@bsd4all.org> In-Reply-To: <f0bf9447-ff9d-afea-db19-245dcaeb02b6@freebsd.org> References: <b859ed18-e511-3640-4662-4242a53d999c@otcnet.ru> <5e36ac3f-39ce-72c5-cd97-dd3c4cf551a7@yandex.ru> <30d1c5f9-56e7-c67b-43e1-e6f0457360a8@otcnet.ru> <c2cb415b-bcde-c714-9412-103e674ce673@yandex.ru> <77c37ff9-8de3-dec0-176a-2b34db136bc5@otcnet.ru> <92930ba6-828d-ecb5-ce37-36794ec80ef7@yandex.ru> <112ea6c0-1927-5f47-24c7-6888295496cf@otcnet.ru> <8d27fbd2-001d-dc46-3621-c44d8dad5522@yandex.ru> <9f94133e-bc7f-7979-72de-e6907f68a254@otcnet.ru> <C6EF4FCA-CBA0-4068-A582-E3C99D209D0C@bsd4all.org> <d4aedb31-245b-b465-8979-2263bdea0ee3@yandex.ru> <f0bf9447-ff9d-afea-db19-245dcaeb02b6@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Andrey, I was planning to move towards Strongswan anyway. The 1st step (with 1 = interface worked great) Julian, The idea of having a jail as VPN end-point is going to help me = transition step by step and possibly have both racoon and strongswan = active. Thx, Peter > On 9 May 2018, at 03:08, Julian Elischer <julian@freebsd.org> wrote: >=20 > On 8/5/18 9:51 pm, Andrey V. Elsukov wrote: >> On 08.05.2018 14:03, peter.blok@bsd4all.org wrote: >>> Hi Victor, >>>=20 >>> I=E2=80=99m struggling wit the same issue. My sainfo doesn=E2=80=99t = match unless I >>> use anonymous. >>>=20 >>> Hi Andrey, >>>=20 >>> What I don=E2=80=99t understand is why a =E2=80=9Ccatchall=E2=80=9D = policy is added instead >>> of the policy that matches the inner tunnel. >> This is because the how IPsec works in BSD network stack. >>=20 >> In simple words - outbound traffic is matched by security policy, >> inbound is matched by security association. >>=20 >> When a packet is going to be send from a host, the kernel checks >> security policies for match. If it is matched, a packet goes into = IPsec >> processing. Then IPsec code using given security policy does lookup = for >> matched security association. And some IPsec transform happens. >>=20 >> When a host receives a packet, it handled by network stack first. And >> if it has corresponding IPsec inner protocol (ESP, AH), it will be >> handled by IPsec code. A packet has embedded SPI, it is used for >> security association lookup. If corresponding SA is found, the IPsec >> code will apply revers IPsec transform to the packet. Then the kernel >> checks, that there is some security policy for that packet. >>=20 >> Now how if_ipsec(4) works. Security policies associated with = interface >> have configured requirements for tunnel mode with configured = addresses. >> Interfaces are designed for route based VPN, and when a packet is = going >> to be send through if_ipsec interface, its "output" routine uses >> security policy associated with interface and with configured = "reqid". >>=20 >> If there are no SAs configured with given reqid, the IPsec code will >> send ACQUIRE message to IKE and it should install SAs, that will be = used >> for IPsec transforms. >>=20 >> When a host receives a packet, it handled by network stack, then by >> IPsec code and when reverse transform is finished, IPsec code checks, = if >> packet was matched by tunnel mode SA it will be checked by if_ipsec >> input routine. If addresses and reqid from SA matched to if_ipsec >> configuration, it will be taken by if_ipsec interface. >>=20 >>=20 >>> What is supposed to happen here? Is the IKE daemon supposed to = update >>> the policy once started. >> In my understanding IKE is only supposed to install SAs for if_ipsec. >> It can't change these policies, because they are immutable. >>=20 >> I think for proper support of several if_ipsec interfaces racoon = needs >> some patches. But I have not spare time to do this job. >> I recommend to use strongswan, it has active developers that are >> responsive and may give some help at least. >>=20 >> There was the link with example, but it also uses only one interface: >> = https://genneko.github.io/playing-with-bsd/networking/freebsd-vti-ipsec >>=20 > my answer was to create a jail to act as the endpoint of each vpn = using VIMAGE and then allow each jail to run its own raccoon. >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-net@freebsd.org <mailto:freebsd-net@freebsd.org> mailing list > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net = <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net>; > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscribe@freebsd.org = <mailto:freebsd-net-unsubscribe@freebsd.org>"
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?15DBFD1E-BC64-4A10-9CE1-E9912544B17C>