[Openswan Users] Multiple tunnels

[Bgs]

Sorry I was away for a few days..


So you mean:

               netA-netB       netB-netC
  netA - gwA <          > gwB <          > gwC - netC
               natA-netC   |   netA-netC
                          netC


and gwB would route netA-netC traffic?

Sounds good... I'll give it a try! :)

Thanks
Bgs


Norman Rasmussen wrote:
> I'm unsure, but don't you have to define two rules from gwA to gwB
> (one for networkB, and the other for networkC).  Same for gwB to gwC
> (one for networkB, one for networA)
> 
> On 5/3/06, Bgs <bgs at bgs.hu> wrote:
> 
>>
>>   Hi all,
>>
>>
>> I was wondering, which is the best way to achieve complete transparency
>> between all networks in the following setup:
>>
>>
>> netA - gwA - Internet - gwB - internet - gwC - netC
>>                           \- netB
>>
>> (For those with non fixed width chars: Three networks are given: netA,
>> netB, netC. They all have their VPN capable gateways (gwA, gwB, gwC
>> respectively). I want to connect netA with netB and netB with netC, but
>> I also want netA to be able to reach netC through A-B + B-C tunnels,
>> without A-C tunnels.)
>>
>> Bye
>> Bgs
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Users at openswan.org
>> http://lists.openswan.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>> Building and Integrating Virtual Private Networks with Openswan:
>> http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1904811256/104-3099591-2946327?n=283155
>>
> 
>