[Openswan Users] Connection to Netscreen 500, PHASE 2 fails
Michael Lavallée
mlavalle at hotmail.com
Thu Dec 6 15:48:35 EST 2007
Hello everyone,
I've been lurking on this list for a while now while I've read through
the Packt Publishing Openswan book and countless Google articles. :-)
I've learned a lot about VPN's the past while, but not nearly enough, it
seems!
I'm trying to setup our Linux server to connect to one of my business
partner's Netscreen 500 boxes. They've got other clients using VPN's
with it. This is going to be a host-to-host VPN, not a network (or
subnet it's also called?) VPN. I'm running openswan 2.4.5.
We are passing PHASE 1 without any problems that I can see, but things
hang up on entering PHASE 2 and I can not tell from the log files what
exactly is going on.
I guess to start off with I should tell you the parameters I was given
by them.
PHASE1: AES 256, PSK, SHA-1, GROUP2, Lifetime 28 800 seconds.
PHASE2: AES 256, SHA-1, GROUP2, Lifetime 3600 seconds, PFS YES.
My configuration, from /etc/ipsec.d/partner.conf
auto=add
authby=secret
compress=no
ike=aes256-sha1-modp1024
esp=aes256-sha1
pfs=yes
left=xxx.xxx.205.212 #My box, Internet IP.
right=xxx.xxx.94.73 #Their box, Interne IP.
This is what they said they configured their NetScreen as for our
specific VPN:
set ike p1-proposal "mlavalle" preshare group2 esp aes256 sha-1 second
28800
set ike p2-proposal "mlavalle" group2 esp aes256 sha-1 second 3600
set ike gateway "mlavalle" address xxx.xxx.205.212 Main
outgoing-interface "ethernet3/1:1" preshare "--snip--" proposal "mlavalle"
set vpn "mlavalle" gateway "mlavalle" no-replay tunnel idletime 0
proposal "mlavalle"
My box has a direct connection to the Internet, and acts as a gateway
for the other workstations here, so I don't think NAT is an issue in
this circumstance. I also have a static Internet IP, as does the
NetScreen I am trying to connect to.
# ipsec auto --up partner
104 "partner" #8: STATE_MAIN_I1: initiate
003 "partner" #8: ignoring unknown Vendor ID payload
[2c78d2631621ef645b510ec9202f31024d1560e50000000200000514]
003 "partner" #8: ignoring Vendor ID payload [HeartBeat Notify 386b0100]
106 "partner" #8: STATE_MAIN_I2: sent MI2, expecting MR2
108 "partner" #8: STATE_MAIN_I3: sent MI3, expecting MR3
004 "partner" #8: STATE_MAIN_I4: ISAKMP SA established
{auth=OAKLEY_PRESHARED_KEY cipher=aes_256 prf=oakley_sha group=modp1024}
117 "partner" #9: STATE_QUICK_I1: initiate
010 "partner" #9: STATE_QUICK_I1: retransmission; will wait 20s for response
010 "partner" #9: STATE_QUICK_I1: retransmission; will wait 40s for response
031 "partner" #9: max number of retransmissions (2) reached
STATE_QUICK_I1. No acceptable response to our first Quick Mode message:
perhaps peer likes no proposal
000 "partner" #9: starting keying attempt 2 of an unlimited number, but
releasing whack
There is a lot of information in my /var/log/secure, I'm not sure if I
should post it all - don't know what the accepted message limit is here
yet! But, I will try and post starting from a logical place to shorten
it down.
13:19:54 server pluto[19629]: "partner" #8: STATE_MAIN_I4: ISAKMP SA
established {auth=OAKLEY_PRESHARED_KEY cipher=aes_256 prf=oakley_sha
group=modp1024}
13:19:54 server pluto[19629]: | modecfg pull: noquirk policy:push not-client
13:19:54 server pluto[19629]: | phase 1 is done, looking for phase 1 to
unpend
13:19:54 server pluto[19629]: | unqueuing pending Quick Mode with
xxx.xxx.94.73 "partner"
13:19:54 server pluto[19629]: | duplicating state object #8
13:19:54 server pluto[19629]: | creating state object #9 at 0x5555558232d0
13:19:54 server pluto[19629]: | processing connection client
13:19:54 server pluto[19629]: | ICOOKIE: 28 b5 cd 0c 0b 5b 7d fe
13:19:54 server pluto[19629]: | RCOOKIE: 7c 86 c1 9f 43 64 4e 3a
13:19:54 server pluto[19629]: | peer: c0 7f 5e 49
13:19:54 server pluto[19629]: | state hash entry 0
13:19:54 server pluto[19629]: | inserting event EVENT_SO_DISCARD,
timeout in 0 seconds for #9
13:19:54 server pluto[19629]: "partner" #9: initiating Quick Mode
PSK+EpartnerYPT+TUNNEL+PFS+UP {using isakmp#8}
13:19:54 server pluto[19629]: | 0: w->pcw_dead: 0 w->pcw_work: 0 cnt: 1
13:19:54 server pluto[19629]: | asking helper 0 to do build_kenonce op
on seq: 9
13:19:54 server pluto[19629]: | inserting event EVENT_CRYPTO_FAILED,
timeout in 300 seconds for #9
13:19:54 server pluto[19633]: ! helper -1 doing build_kenonce op id: 9
13:19:54 server pluto[19629]: | next event EVENT_PENDING_PHASE2 in 4 seconds
13:19:54 server pluto[19629]: | processing connection partner
13:19:54 server pluto[19629]: | kernel_alg_db_new() will return
p_new->protoid=3, p_new->trans_cnt=1
13:19:54 server pluto[19629]: | kernel_alg_db_new() trans[0]:
transid=12, attr_cnt=2, attrs[0].type=5, attrs[0].val=2
13:19:54 server pluto[19629]: | returning new proposal from esp_info
13:19:54 server pluto[19629]: | sending 268 bytes for quick_outI1
through eth2:500 to 192.127.94.73:500:
13:19:54 server pluto[19629]: | inserting event EVENT_RETRANSMIT,
timeout in 10 seconds for #9
13:19:54 server pluto[19629]: | next event EVENT_PENDING_PHASE2 in 4 seconds
13:19:58 server pluto[19629]: |
13:19:58 server pluto[19629]: | *time to handle event
13:19:58 server pluto[19629]: | handling event EVENT_PENDING_PHASE2
13:19:58 server pluto[19629]: | event after this is EVENT_RETRANSMIT in
6 seconds
13:19:58 server pluto[19629]: | inserting event EVENT_PENDING_PHASE2,
timeout in 120 seconds
13:19:58 server pluto[19629]: | pending review: connection "partner" checked
13:19:58 server pluto[19629]: | next event EVENT_RETRANSMIT in 6 seconds
for #9
13:20:04 server pluto[19629]: |
13:20:04 server pluto[19629]: | *time to handle event
13:20:04 server pluto[19629]: | handling event EVENT_RETRANSMIT
13:20:04 server pluto[19629]: | event after this is EVENT_PENDING_PHASE2
in 114 seconds
13:20:04 server pluto[19629]: | processing connection partner
13:20:04 server pluto[19629]: | handling event EVENT_RETRANSMIT for
xxx.xxx.94.73 "partner" #9
13:20:04 server pluto[19629]: | sending 268 bytes for EVENT_RETRANSMIT
through eth2:500 to xxx.xxx.xx.73:500:
13:20:04 server pluto[19629]: | inserting event EVENT_RETRANSMIT,
timeout in 20 seconds for #9
13:20:04 server pluto[19629]: | next event EVENT_RETRANSMIT in 20
seconds for #9
13:20:24 server pluto[19629]: |
13:20:24 server pluto[19629]: | *received kernel message
13:20:24 server pluto[19629]: | next event EVENT_RETRANSMIT in 0 seconds
for #9
13:20:24 server pluto[19629]: |
13:20:24 server pluto[19629]: | *time to handle event
13:20:24 server pluto[19629]: | handling event EVENT_RETRANSMIT
13:20:24 server pluto[19629]: | event after this is EVENT_PENDING_PHASE2
in 94 seconds
13:20:24 server pluto[19629]: | processing connection partner
13:20:24 server pluto[19629]: | handling event EVENT_RETRANSMIT for
xxx.xxx.94.73 "partner" #9
13:20:24 server pluto[19629]: | sending 268 bytes for EVENT_RETRANSMIT
through eth2:500 to xxx.xxx.xx.73:500:
13:20:24 server pluto[19629]: | inserting event EVENT_RETRANSMIT,
timeout in 40 seconds for #9
13:20:24 server pluto[19629]: | next event EVENT_RETRANSMIT in 40
seconds for #9
13:21:04 server pluto[19629]: |
13:21:04 server pluto[19629]: | *time to handle event
13:21:04 server pluto[19629]: | handling event EVENT_RETRANSMIT
13:21:04 server pluto[19629]: | event after this is EVENT_PENDING_PHASE2
in 54 seconds
13:21:04 server pluto[19629]: | processing connection partner
13:21:04 server pluto[19629]: | handling event EVENT_RETRANSMIT for
xxx.xxx.94.73 "partner" #9
13:21:04 server pluto[19629]: "partner" #9: max number of
retransmissions (2) reached STATE_QUICK_I1. No acceptable response to
our first Quick Mode message: perhaps peer likes no proposal
From there it just seems to be the same 'ol thing. If I've made a
mistake and grabbed the wrong section, please let me know and I will
repost or maybe link to the full log or something.
Reading that log, I'm not entirely sure where I've failed in my
configuration. There was one message that stood out, an
"EVENT_CRYPTO_FAILED", but I'm not sure how / if that plays into things
as I thought the pre-shared key stuff was done in STAGE 1.
Any help or direction is greatly appreciated!
Thanks,
Michael.
More information about the Users
mailing list