[Openswan Users]
Brian Candler
B.Candler at pobox.com
Fri Mar 10 16:51:37 CET 2006
(Sorry to reply to myself again :-)
On Fri, Mar 10, 2006 at 03:35:18PM +0000, Brian Candler wrote:
> If I run tcpdump on the openswan box's own interface, I see some packets
> with {src 500, dst 4500} and others with {src 4500, dst 4500}. As far as I
> can tell, the 500/4500 ones are IKE, and 4500/4500 are payload (i.e. test
> pings)
>
> Is this correct, or is openswan messing up here?? Since there are two
> different source ports, of course these get mapped to two different ones via
> the intervening NAT.
Turning on natt debugging in openswan, I also see:
Jan 2 01:34:46 (none) kern.debug pluto[9211]: | processing connection pix
Jan 2 01:34:46 (none) kern.debug pluto[9211]: | NAT-T: updating local port to 500
Jan 2 01:34:46 (none) kern.debug pluto[9211]: | NAT-T connection has wrong interface definition 172.151.113.52:500 vs 172.151.113.52:4500
Jan 2 01:34:46 (none) kern.debug pluto[9211]: | NAT-T: using interface vlan1:500
Jan 2 01:34:46 (none) kern.warn pluto[9211]: "pix" #2: STATE_QUICK_I2: sent QI2, IPsec SA established {ESP=>0x29cf73ce <0x51a72e7e xfrm=3DES_0-HMAC_MD5 NATD=none DPD=none}
And doing some more searching, I find someone else has reported this problem
already at http://archives.free.net.ph/message/20051207.122311.bc3b76ca.en.html
and even provided a patch:
--- nat_traversal.c.orig 2006-03-10 15:56:20.000000000 +0000
+++ nat_traversal.c 2006-03-10 15:56:38.000000000 +0000
@@ -806,7 +806,8 @@
* need to change port (MAIN_I3 or QUICK_I1)
*/
if (((st->st_state == STATE_MAIN_I3)
- || (st->st_state == STATE_QUICK_I1))
+ || (st->st_state == STATE_AGGR_I2))
&& (st->hidden_variables.st_nat_traversal & NAT_T_WITH_PORT_FLOATING)
&& (st->hidden_variables.st_nat_traversal & NAT_T_DETECTED)
&& (st->st_localport != NAT_T_IKE_FLOAT_PORT))
And now it works, phew :-) [as long as I stick with PFS]
I see this bug is already in the ticket system:
http://bugs.xelerance.com/view.php?id=231
Any chance of getting this or something equivalent into 2.4.5?
Regards,
Brian.
P.S. IPSEC over GPRS is pretty painful :-)
$ ping 10.1.1.12
PING 10.1.1.12 (10.1.1.12): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 10.1.1.12: icmp_seq=0 ttl=126 time=811.480 ms
64 bytes from 10.1.1.12: icmp_seq=1 ttl=126 time=648.593 ms
64 bytes from 10.1.1.12: icmp_seq=3 ttl=126 time=959.966 ms
64 bytes from 10.1.1.12: icmp_seq=4 ttl=126 time=847.839 ms
...
More information about the Users
mailing list