[Openswan Users] Connecting to Cisco VPN, getting INVALID_ID_INFORMATION followed by "perhaps peer likes no proposal"
simon charles
charlessimon at hotmail.com
Wed Mar 19 17:52:13 EDT 2014
Tim ,
Looks like the vpn tunnel has been established. What does your firewall rules look like on XX.XX.XX.XX and YY.YY.YY.YY
What happens when do you execute this command from the XX.XX.XX.XX server
# ping YY.YY.YY.YY -I
XX.XX.XX.XX
- Simon Charles -
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2014 14:30:51 -0700
Subject: Re: [Openswan Users] Connecting to Cisco VPN, getting INVALID_ID_INFORMATION followed by "perhaps peer likes no proposal"
From: tim at mccune.name
To: charlessimon at hotmail.com
CC: users at lists.openswan.org
Progress! I just went back into ipsec.conf and removed all of the additional settings that I had been trying to experiment with, until I just had a very basic configuration:
conn server-a
left=XX.XX.XX.XX
right=CC.CC.CC.CC
rightsubnet=YY.YY.YY.YY/32
authby=secret
auto=start
Now I can ping CC.CC.CC.CC and my pluto.log file ends with:
STATE_QUICK_I2: sent QI2, IPsec SA established tunnel mode {ESP=>0xd574cb40 <0xb49adebe xfrm=3DES_0-HMAC_SHA1 NATOA=none NATD=none DPD=none}
However, I cannot seem to reach the port that is supposed to be open on YY.YY.YY.YY.
On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 1:40 PM, Tim McCune <tim at mccune.name> wrote:
THANK YOU. That was clearly a piece of the puzzle that I had failed to wrap my head around: that I needed 2 different connection declarations for the 2 different hosts, even though they were both routing through the same VPN appliance. I am now getting a different error message, which seems like progress. :) Now, instead of INVALID_ID_INFORMATION, I'm getting back NO_PROPOSAL_CHOSEN. Off to google that message, but if anyone has any insights into that one as well, I would appreciate it. Thanks again for moving me what seems to be one step closer.
On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 12:43 PM, simon charles <charlessimon at hotmail.com> wrote:
Tim ,
Based on your ip addressing convention - i am presuming the following
XX.XX.XX.XX is your Server A
YY.YY.YY.YY is your Server B
ZZ.ZZ.ZZ.ZZ is your Server C
If that is true then the ipsec configuration should look something like this
conn ServerA-to-ServerB
left=XX.XX.XX.XX
leftsubnet=
XX.XX.XX.XX
/32
right=CC.CC.CC.CC ( public ip addr of the Cisco VPN device )
rightsubnet=
YY.YY.YY.YY
/32
authby=secret
auto=start
ike=aes128-sha1;modp1024
phase2=esp
phase2alg=aes128-sha1;modp1024
pfs=yes
aggrmode=no
salifetime=28800s
conn ServerA-to-ServerC
left=XX.XX.XX.XX
leftsubnet=
XX.XX.XX.XX
/32
right=CC.CC.CC.CC ( public ip addr of the Cisco VPN device )
rightsubnet= ZZ.ZZ.ZZ.ZZ/32
authby=secret
auto=start
ike=aes128-sha1;modp1024
phase2=esp
phase2alg=aes128-sha1;modp1024
pfs=yes
aggrmode=no
salifetime=28800s
- Simon Charles -
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2014 12:24:58 -0700
Subject: Re: [Openswan Users] Connecting to Cisco VPN, getting INVALID_ID_INFORMATION followed by "perhaps peer likes no proposal"
From: tim at mccune.name
To: charlessimon at hotmail.com
CC: users at lists.openswan.org
Thanks Simon. This seems like a reasonable guess based on other stuff I've found while searching online. However, I have to confess that I just don't understand how to translate from what I've pasted from the Cisco configuration into an openswan config. Here is the network topology that we are trying to accomplish:
---->[Customer Server B]
[My Server A (running openswan)] <-------> [Customer Cisco VPN appliance] -----|
---->[Customer Server C]
Where all 4 of the servers in that diagram have public IP addresses. What would the rightsubnet and leftsubnet settings on the openswan side need to be in a case like that? I'm confused because we are not trying to reach a private network. We just want to tell our server "when communicating with server B and server C, use the ipsec tunnel."
On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 11:44 AM, simon charles <charlessimon at hotmail.com> wrote:
Tim ,
I did not see the rightsubnet and leftsubnet listed in your ipsec configuration. It is possible that you have a mismatch between what you have for your leftsubnet/rightsubnet and what Cisco side has for its access-list 127 ( which is a translation of {local subnet} { remote subnet } )
- Simon Charles -
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2014 09:52:12 -0700
From: tim at mccune.name
To: users at lists.openswan.org
Subject: [Openswan Users] Connecting to Cisco VPN, getting INVALID_ID_INFORMATION followed by "perhaps peer likes no proposal"
Hi there. I was wondering if anyone could help me out with this problem I'm having trying to connect from openswan 2.6.38 on Ubuntu Lucid to a Cisco VPN appliance. I don't seem to be able to establish a connection. Here is the output I get in pluto.log:
"mine" #1: initiating Main Mode
"mine" #1: ignoring Vendor ID payload [Cisco IKE Fragmentation]
"mine" #1: transition from state STATE_MAIN_I1 to state STATE_MAIN_I2
"mine" #1: STATE_MAIN_I2: sent MI2, expecting MR2
"mine" #1: received Vendor ID payload [Cisco-Unity]
"mine" #1: received Vendor ID payload [XAUTH]
"mine" #1: ignoring unknown Vendor ID payload [716e44df1a91b4edaffa5ff96dd22125]
"mine" #1: ignoring Vendor ID payload [Cisco VPN 3000 Series]
"mine" #1: transition from state STATE_MAIN_I2 to state STATE_MAIN_I3
"mine" #1: STATE_MAIN_I3: sent MI3, expecting MR3
"mine" #1: received Vendor ID payload [Dead Peer Detection]
"mine" #1: Main mode peer ID is ID_IPV4_ADDR: 'XX.XX.XX.XX'
"mine" #1: transition from state STATE_MAIN_I3 to state STATE_MAIN_I4
"mine" #1: STATE_MAIN_I4: ISAKMP SA established {auth=OAKLEY_PRESHARED_KEY cipher=aes_128 prf=oakley_sha group=modp1024}
"mine" #2: initiating Quick Mode PSK+ENCRYPT+TUNNEL+PFS+UP+IKEv2ALLOW+SAREFTRACK {using isakmp#1 msgid:c359ad28 proposal=AES(12)_128-SHA1(2)_160 pfsgroup=OAKLEY_GROUP_MODP1024}
"mine" #1: ignoring informational payload, type INVALID_ID_INFORMATION msgid=00000000
"mine" #1: received and ignored informational message
"mine" #1: received Delete SA payload: deleting ISAKMP State #1
packet from 80.87.94.106:500: received and ignored informational message
"mine" #2: max number of retransmissions (2) reached STATE_QUICK_I1. No acceptable response to our first Quick Mode message: perhaps peer likes no proposal
"mine" #2: starting keying attempt 2 of an unlimited number
and this output just repeats over and over. As far as I can tell, we are sending all of the correct parameters in our proposal, based on the configuration information we have been given by the organization that maintains the Cisco appliance. Here is what they provided us with:
Phase 1:
Encryption scheme: IKE
Authentication Method: Pre-Shared Key
Diffie-Hellman Group: Group 2
Encryption Algorithm: AES128
Hashing Algorithm: SHA-1
Main or Aggressive Mode: Main Mode
Lifetime (for renegotiation): 28800 seconds
Phase 2:
Encapsulation mode: tunnel
Encryption algorithm ESP: AES128
Authentication Algorithm: SHA-1
Perfect Forward Secrecy: Group 2
Lifetime (for renegotiation): 3600 seconds
Here is the configuration on our end in ipsec.conf:
conn mine
left=XX.XX.XX.XX
right=XX.XX.XX.XX
authby=secret
auto=start
ike=aes128-sha1;modp1024
phase2=esp
phase2alg=aes128-sha1;modp1024
pfs=yes
aggrmode=no
salifetime=28800s
And here is the configuration on their end on the Cisco appliance:
crypto ipsec transform-set MyOrg esp-aes esp-sha-hmac
crypto map gtvpn-rules 127 match address 127
crypto map gtvpn-rules 127 set pfs group2
crypto map gtvpn-rules 127 set peer XX.XX.XX.XX
crypto map gtvpn-rules 127 set transform-set MyOrg
crypto map gtvpn-rules 127 set security-association lifetime seconds 3600
tunnel-group XX.XX.XX.XX type ipsec-l2l
tunnel-group XX.XX.XX.XX ipsec-attributes
pre-shared-key xxxxxxxx
access-list 127 extended permit ip host YY.YY.YY.YY host XX.XX.XX.XX
access-list 127 extended permit ip host ZZ.ZZ.ZZ.ZZ host XX.XX.XX.XX
Any guidance would be appreciated.
Thank you!!
_______________________________________________
Users at lists.openswan.org
https://lists.openswan.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Micropayments: https://flattr.com/thing/38387/IPsec-for-Linux-made-easy
Building and Integrating Virtual Private Networks with Openswan:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1904811256/104-3099591-2946327?n=283155
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openswan.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20140319/fc7ab7b3/attachment.html>
More information about the Users
mailing list