[Openswan Users] perhaps peer likes no proposal
Aaron Zhang
bzhang at sonicwall.com
Tue Nov 25 20:24:10 EST 2008
I think the phase1 has been established successfully , so it does not result from the aggressive mode.
Could you disable the pfs=no and have a try ?
Thanks!
Aaron (Bo) Zhang
________________________________
From: users-bounces at openswan.org [mailto:users-bounces at openswan.org] On Behalf Of simon charles
Sent: 2008年11月26日 3:28
To: tudor.georgescu at aardman.com; users at openswan.org
Subject: Re: [Openswan Users] perhaps peer likes no proposal
Hi !
From the logs - openswan is trying to connect using 'aggressive mode' - is the watchguard expecting to connect using aggresive mode ?. Aggressive mode is less secure than main mode - unless you are using a roadwarrior configuration - i would recommend that you use main mode.
Thanks !
________________________________
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2008 17:33:16 +0000
From: Tudor.Georgescu at aardman.com
To: users at openswan.org
Subject: [Openswan Users] perhaps peer likes no proposal
Hey guys,
I have been struggling with this for a few days now. I've become thoroughly stuck on this on what I believe may be phase2.
I am trying to connect openswan-2.6.19 [left] (and openswan-2.6.19 upto the .19 release) to a WatchGuard Firebox [right].
Many releases ago, this was once possible: http://wiki.openswan.org/index.php/Interop/InteroperatingWatchguard
Unfortunately following many tutorials and the Paul and Ken book has still left me in the dark.
I have been on the #openswan irc channel and they suggested that "perhaps peer likes no proposal" means I'm not matching IKE or ESP properly. I've checked, double checked, and thrice checked both ends, but I'm still getting stuck.
Settings-wise what is still a mystery to me is the tunnel settings. On the Watchguard end, its configured to give me the virtual IP of a.b.c.d, which puts me on the network w.x.y.z/24. I've tried various rightnexthop/rightsubnet settings, but that does not appear to make any changes to the connection. Am I barking up the wrong tree? Does the tunnel have anything to do with "perhaps peer likes no proposal"?
Any explinations of what the following means would also be much appreciated. I.e. what is STATE_AGGR_I2 trying to achieve?
localhost pluto[27033]: "myvpn" #1: retransmitting in response to duplicate packet; already STATE_AGGR_I2
localhost pluto[27033]: "myvpn" #1: discarding duplicate packet -- exhausted retransmission; already STATE_AGGR_I2
Thank you in advance guys and gals.
Tudor
# /etc/ipsec.conf - Openswan IPsec configuration file
version 2.0 # conforms to second version of ipsec.conf specification
config setup
interfaces=%defaultroute
nat_traversal=yes
OE=off
protostack=netkey
uniqueids=yes
conn myvpn
pfs=yes
authby=secret
type=tunnel
aggrmode=yes
keyexchange=ike
auth=esp
ike=aes256-sha1-modp1024
esp=aes256-sha1;modp1024
left=10.0.0.128
leftsubnet=10.0.0.0/24
leftnexthop=10.0.0.138
leftid=my at id.com
right=<vpn.public.ip>
#rightnexthop=a.b.c.d
rightsubnet=w.x.y.z/24
rightid=<vpn.public.ip>
auto=start
The output was from rel 2.6.18, but I get the same from 2.6.19.
/var/log/messages
localhost pluto[26477]: shutting down
localhost pluto[26477]: forgetting secrets
localhost pluto[26477]: "myvpn": deleting connection
localhost pluto[26477]: "myvpn" #1: deleting state (STATE_AGGR_I2)
localhost pluto[26477]: "myvpn": request to delete a unrouted policy with netkey kernel --- experimental
localhost pluto[26477]: shutting down interface lo/lo ::1:500
localhost pluto[26477]: shutting down interface lo/lo 127.0.0.1:4500
localhost pluto[26477]: shutting down interface lo/lo 127.0.0.1:500
localhost pluto[26477]: shutting down interface eth0/eth0 10.0.0.128:4500
localhost pluto[26477]: shutting down interface eth0/eth0 10.0.0.128:500
localhost ipsec__plutorun: Starting Pluto subsystem...
localhost pluto[27033]: Starting Pluto (Openswan Version 2.6.18; Vendor ID OE}ZvZ at M[OWD) pid:27033
localhost pluto[27033]: Setting NAT-Traversal port-4500 floating to on
localhost pluto[27033]: port floating activation criteria nat_t=1/port_float=1
localhost pluto[27033]: including NAT-Traversal patch (Version 0.6c)
localhost pluto[27033]: using /dev/urandom as source of random entropy
localhost pluto[27033]: ike_alg_register_enc(): Activating OAKLEY_TWOFISH_CBC_SSH: Ok (ret=0)
localhost pluto[27033]: ike_alg_register_enc(): Activating OAKLEY_TWOFISH_CBC: Ok (ret=0)
localhost pluto[27033]: ike_alg_register_enc(): Activating OAKLEY_SERPENT_CBC: Ok (ret=0)
localhost pluto[27033]: ike_alg_register_enc(): Activating OAKLEY_AES_CBC: Ok (ret=0)
localhost pluto[27033]: ike_alg_register_enc(): Activating OAKLEY_BLOWFISH_CBC: Ok (ret=0)
localhost pluto[27033]: ike_alg_register_hash(): Activating OAKLEY_SHA2_512: Ok (ret=0)
localhost pluto[27033]: ike_alg_register_hash(): Activating OAKLEY_SHA2_256: Ok (ret=0)
localhost pluto[27033]: starting up 1 cryptographic helpers
localhost pluto[27034]: using /dev/urandom as source of random entropy
localhost pluto[27033]: started helper pid=27034 (fd:7)
localhost pluto[27033]: Using Linux 2.6 IPsec interface code on 2.6.26.5-28.fc8 (experimental code)
localhost pluto[27033]: ike_alg_register_enc(): WARNING: enc alg=0 not found in constants.c:oakley_enc_names
localhost pluto[27033]: ike_alg_register_enc(): Activating <NULL>: Ok (ret=0)
localhost pluto[27033]: ike_alg_register_enc(): WARNING: enc alg=0 not found in constants.c:oakley_enc_names
localhost pluto[27033]: ike_alg_add(): ERROR: Algorithm already exists
localhost pluto[27033]: ike_alg_register_enc(): Activating <NULL>: FAILED (ret=-17)
localhost pluto[27033]: ike_alg_register_enc(): WARNING: enc alg=0 not found in constants.c:oakley_enc_names
localhost pluto[27033]: ike_alg_add(): ERROR: Algorithm already exists
localhost pluto[27033]: ike_alg_register_enc(): Activating <NULL>: FAILED (ret=-17)
localhost pluto[27033]: ike_alg_register_enc(): WARNING: enc alg=0 not found in constants.c:oakley_enc_names
localhost pluto[27033]: ike_alg_add(): ERROR: Algorithm already exists
localhost pluto[27033]: ike_alg_register_enc(): Activating <NULL>: FAILED (ret=-17)
localhost pluto[27033]: ike_alg_register_enc(): WARNING: enc alg=0 not found in constants.c:oakley_enc_names
localhost pluto[27033]: ike_alg_add(): ERROR: Algorithm already exists
localhost pluto[27033]: ike_alg_register_enc(): Activating <NULL>: FAILED (ret=-17)
localhost pluto[27033]: ike_alg_register_enc(): WARNING: enc alg=0 not found in constants.c:oakley_enc_names
localhost pluto[27033]: ike_alg_add(): ERROR: Algorithm already exists
localhost pluto[27033]: ike_alg_register_enc(): Activating <NULL>: FAILED (ret=-17)
localhost pluto[27033]: Changed path to directory '/etc/ipsec.d/cacerts'
localhost pluto[27033]: Changed path to directory '/etc/ipsec.d/aacerts'
localhost pluto[27033]: Changed path to directory '/etc/ipsec.d/ocspcerts'
localhost pluto[27033]: Changing to directory '/etc/ipsec.d/crls'
localhost pluto[27033]: Warning: empty directory
localhost pluto[27033]: Changing back to directory '/tmp' failed - (2 No such file or directory)
localhost pluto[27033]: Changing back to directory '/tmp' failed - (2 No such file or directory)
localhost pluto[27033]: added connection description "myvpn"
localhost pluto[27033]: listening for IKE messages
localhost pluto[27033]: adding interface eth0/eth0 10.0.0.128:500
localhost pluto[27033]: adding interface eth0/eth0 10.0.0.128:4500
localhost pluto[27033]: adding interface lo/lo 127.0.0.1:500
localhost pluto[27033]: adding interface lo/lo 127.0.0.1:4500
localhost pluto[27033]: adding interface lo/lo ::1:500
localhost pluto[27033]: loading secrets from "/etc/ipsec.secrets"
localhost pluto[27033]: "myvpn": request to add a prospective erouted policy with netkey kernel --- experimental
localhost pluto[27033]: "myvpn" #1: initiating Aggressive Mode #1, connection "myvpn"
localhost pluto[27033]: | setting sec: 1
localhost pluto[27033]: "myvpn" #1: received Vendor ID payload [Dead Peer Detection]
localhost pluto[27033]: "myvpn" #1: received Vendor ID payload [draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-02_n] method set to=106
localhost pluto[27033]: "myvpn" #1: Aggressive mode peer ID is ID_IPV4_ADDR: '<vpn.public.ip>'
localhost pluto[27033]: "myvpn" #1: NAT-Traversal: Result using draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-02/03: i am NATed
localhost pluto[27033]: "myvpn" #1: Aggressive mode peer ID is ID_IPV4_ADDR: '<vpn.public.ip>'
localhost pluto[27033]: "myvpn" #1: transition from state STATE_AGGR_I1 to state STATE_AGGR_I2
localhost pluto[27033]: "myvpn" #1: STATE_AGGR_I2: sent AI2, ISAKMP SA established {auth=OAKLEY_PRESHARED_KEY cipher=aes_256 prf=oakley_sha group=modp1024}
localhost pluto[27033]: "myvpn" #2: initiating Quick Mode PSK+ENCRYPT+TUNNEL+PFS+UP+AGGRESSIVE+IKEv2ALLOW {using isakmp#1 msgid:131f6317 proposal=AES(12)_256-SHA1(2)_160 pfsgroup=OAKLEY_GROUP_MODP1024}
localhost pluto[27033]: "myvpn" #1: retransmitting in response to duplicate packet; already STATE_AGGR_I2
localhost pluto[27033]: "myvpn" #1: retransmitting in response to duplicate packet; already STATE_AGGR_I2
localhost pluto[27033]: "myvpn" #1: discarding duplicate packet -- exhausted retransmission; already STATE_AGGR_I2
localhost pluto[27033]: "myvpn" #2: max number of retransmissions (2) reached STATE_QUICK_I1. No acceptable response to our first Quick Mode message: perhaps peer likes no proposal
localhost pluto[27033]: "myvpn" #2: starting keying attempt 2 of at most 3
Nov 21 18:02:42 localhost pluto[27033]: "myvpn" #3: initiating Quick Mode PSK+ENCRYPT+TUNNEL+PFS+UP+AGGRESSIVE+IKEv2ALLOW to replace #2 {using isakmp#1 msgid:bd4d55d2 proposal=AES(12)_256-SHA1(2)_160 pfsgroup=OAKLEY_GROUP_MODP1024}
localhost pluto[27033]: "myvpn" #3: max number of retransmissions (2) reached STATE_QUICK_I1. No acceptable response to our first Quick Mode message: perhaps peer likes no proposal
localhost pluto[27033]: "myvpn" #3: starting keying attempt 3 of at most 3
localhost pluto[27033]: "myvpn" #4: initiating Quick Mode PSK+ENCRYPT+TUNNEL+PFS+UP+AGGRESSIVE+IKEv2ALLOW to replace #3 {using isakmp#1 msgid:947f04f5 proposal=AES(12)_256-SHA1(2)_160 pfsgroup=OAKLEY_GROUP_MODP1024}
localhost pluto[27033]: "myvpn" #4: max number of retransmissions (2) reached STATE_QUICK_I1. No acceptable response to our first Quick Mode message: perhaps peer likes no proposal
- --------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.aardman.com
______________________________________________________________________
This message has been checked for all known viruses by the MessageLabs
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.openswan.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20081125/ab656703/attachment-0001.html
More information about the Users
mailing list