Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 29 Dec 2005 13:35:21 +0100
From:      VANHULLEBUS Yvan <vanhu_bsd@zeninc.net>
To:        freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re:  IPSEC documentation
Message-ID:  <20051229123521.GA1854@zen.inc>
In-Reply-To: <20051229121359.GA10949@uk.tiscali.com>
References:  <20051228143817.GA6898@uk.tiscali.com> <001401c60bc0$a3c87e90$1200a8c0@gsicomp.on.ca> <20051228153106.GA7041@uk.tiscali.com> <20051228164339.GB3875@zen.inc> <868xu5p2ze.fsf@srvbsdnanssv.interne.kisoft-services.com> <20051229121359.GA10949@uk.tiscali.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Dec 29, 2005 at 12:14:00PM +0000, Brian Candler wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 28, 2005 at 06:04:37PM +0100, Eric Masson wrote:
[....]
> > ports/net/sl2tps
> 
> I was rather surprised that I just got IPSEC tunnel mode working between
> Windows XP and FreeBSD; and then afterwards I also got transport mode + L2TP
> working using the Windows client and sl2tps. Zounds!

Very interesting, I'll try that ASAP !


> There is a bug (arguably) in the ipsec-tools port, in that all useful
> messages are logged at level 'daemon.info', but the default syslog.conf
> discards these messages. Once that's fixed, debugging suddenly becomes a
> whole lot easier :-) I've submitted a PR.

Got the mail about the PR, but I curently can't see the PR itself (PR
database busy). I'll handle it as soon as I'll get the real PR.


[....]
> Once up, I can happily ping through the L2TP tunnel and run short telnet
> sessions but I can't view large web pages, which looks like an MTU issue.

Yep, that is the most probable reason !


> As it happens this FreeBSD box is also acting as a NAT gateway using pf
> (myhost is on a private IP) and actually its external IP is also private -
> it sits behind a second NAT firewall. So maybe that's where the problem
> originates, although I really can't understand where the value of 1380 comes
> from.

1500 - (pppoe encapsulation ?) - ESP header - L2TP encapsulation....

And perhaps another extra UDP encapsulation may be considered, but I
guess you probably don't have NAT-T support.


Yvan.

-- 
NETASQ - Secure Internet Connectivity
http://www.netasq.com



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20051229123521.GA1854>