Works with implementation of T3620
- Feed Queries
- All Stories
- Search
- Feed Search
- Transactions
- Transaction Logs
Jun 12 2021
Jun 11 2021
Included in PR: https://github.com/vyos/vyos-1x/pull/881
It's a bit confusing, I can create a tunnel with 0.0.0.0/0 if I need it. That how it is also done on PaloAlto FW and Fortigate. Anyway, it is just my opinion. Thanks for picking up this request so quickly.
I've left vti esp-group to keep backwards compatibility with current behaviour when vti is configured without any tunnels (when it uses 0.0.0.0/0), in that scenario it would still use the group specified.
@sdev That makes sense, you can also get rid of "esp-group" under vti as it will be specified per tunnel.
I like that we can specify multiple prefixes under one tunnel but also can configure multiple tunnels for more complex scenarios.
I wonder if instead it should just use the existing tunnel node for this. So if VTI is set on a peer, all configured tunnels get marked for the VTI interface. Current VyOS behaviour allows only for tunnels, or VTI - not both.
@sdev Yes, this can be done identically as the tunnel definition.
@krox2 Oh I think I understand what you mean. You'd want to also be able to create multiple child SAs each with unique left/right subnets?
This does not appear to be fixed; I think it's something specific to 1.4:
trae@cr01a-vyos# commit
Using source address fd52:d62e:8011:fffe:192:168:253:2
Archiving config...
sftp://stor01z-rh8.int.trae32566.org:/int/cr01a-vyos Traceback (most recent call last):
File "<string>", line 1, in <module>
File "/usr/lib/python3/dist-packages/vyos/remote.py", line 287, in upload
upload_sftp(local_path, url.hostname, url.path, username, password, port, source, progressbar)
File "/usr/lib/python3/dist-packages/vyos/remote.py", line 166, in upload_sftp
transfer_sftp('upload', *args, **kwargs)
File "/usr/lib/python3/dist-packages/vyos/remote.py", line 162, in transfer_sftp
sock.shutdown()
TypeError: shutdown() takes exactly one argument (0 given)
[edit policy route-map BGP-BACKBONE-OUT]
trae@cr01a-vyos# run show verI have a similar problem, but different, in T3563. I've reopened it and added information, but basically 1.4 still has the issue reported in that bug report.
See [1] from the previous post:
Note: If you don't want to install anything and don't care about some potential security problems, just enable the following 2 options to get native GRE keepalive support on Linux: […]
I care. Setting these sysctl parameters allows for relaying arbitrary traffic through the router.
Jun 10 2021
@sdev Will it not create a full mesh, for example:
10.10.10.0/24 <--> 192.168.10.0/24
10.10.20.0/24 <--> 192.168.20.0/24
It will also set IPsec for 10.10.10.0/24 <--> 192.168.20.0/24 and 10.10.20.0/24 <--> 192.168.10.0/24 that may not be desired.
@Viacheslav Can be similar to policy-based ipsec
# set vpn ipsec site-to-site peer 1.1.1.1 tunnel 1
Possible completions:
allow-nat-networks
Option to allow NAT networks
allow-public-networks
Option to allow public networks
disable Option to disable vpn tunnel
esp-group ESP group name
> local Local parameters for interesting traffic
protocol Protocol to encrypt
> remote Remote parameters for interesting traffic@krox2 How should looks like a configuration for many local/remote traffic selectors per one vti interface?
Already backported: ff7b2b0e62510ef8de28c9c4bfa34badeabec775
no_tag_node_value_mangle=True does not exist on VyOS 1.3, thus a backport is currently not possible. @jestabro can we backport this?
@Viacheslav This is confirmed fixed, I'm guessing it got fixed during the period between reporting it and now.
I can't reproduce it, VyOS 1.3-beta-202106081558
set policy prefix-list FOO rule 10 action 'permit' set policy prefix-list FOO rule 10 prefix '0.0.0.0/0' set policy route-map FOO rule 10 action 'permit' set policy route-map FOO rule 10 match ip address prefix-list 'FOO' set policy route-map FOO rule 10 set distance '220' set policy route-map FOO rule 1000 action 'permit'
Jun 9 2021
@n.fort You can try to replace True with False there (1.3 and 1.4). But it needs more tests. In some cases, it was some bugs with the DHCP server and not the primary address.
https://github.com/vyos/vyos-1x/blob/5d068442cf7b1863724c83168176ce2940a023fe/src/conf_mode/dhcp_server.py#L237
VyOS 1.3-beta-202106081558
Works as expected.
Jun 9 19:57:38 r4-1 charon: 13[CFG] no IKE_SA named 'peer-192.0.2.2-tunnel-0' found
Jun 9 19:57:38 r4-1 charon: 14[CFG] received stroke: initiate 'peer-192.0.2.2-tunnel-0'
Jun 9 19:57:38 r4-1 charon: 06[IKE] <peer-192.0.2.2-tunnel-0|4> initiating Main Mode IKE_SA peer-192.0.2.2-tunnel-0[4] to 192.0.2.2
Jun 9 19:57:38 r4-1 charon: 06[ENC] <peer-192.0.2.2-tunnel-0|4> generating ID_PROT request 0 [ SA V V V V V ]
Jun 9 19:57:38 r4-1 charon: 06[NET] <peer-192.0.2.2-tunnel-0|4> sending packet: from 192.0.2.1[500] to 192.0.2.2[500] (180 bytes)
Jun 9 19:57:38 r4-1 charon: 07[NET] <peer-192.0.2.2-tunnel-0|4> received packet: from 192.0.2.2[500] to 192.0.2.1[500] (160 bytes)
Jun 9 19:57:38 r4-1 charon: 07[ENC] <peer-192.0.2.2-tunnel-0|4> parsed ID_PROT response 0 [ SA V V V V ]
Jun 9 19:57:38 r4-1 charon: 07[IKE] <peer-192.0.2.2-tunnel-0|4> received XAuth vendor ID
Jun 9 19:57:38 r4-1 charon: 07[IKE] <peer-192.0.2.2-tunnel-0|4> received DPD vendor ID
Jun 9 19:57:38 r4-1 charon: 07[IKE] <peer-192.0.2.2-tunnel-0|4> received FRAGMENTATION vendor ID
Jun 9 19:57:38 r4-1 charon: 07[IKE] <peer-192.0.2.2-tunnel-0|4> received NAT-T (RFC 3947) vendor ID
Jun 9 19:57:38 r4-1 charon: 07[CFG] <peer-192.0.2.2-tunnel-0|4> selected proposal: IKE:AES_CBC_256/HMAC_SHA1_96/PRF_HMAC_SHA1/MODP_1024
Jun 9 19:57:38 r4-1 charon: 07[ENC] <peer-192.0.2.2-tunnel-0|4> generating ID_PROT request 0 [ KE No NAT-D NAT-D ]
Jun 9 19:57:38 r4-1 charon: 07[NET] <peer-192.0.2.2-tunnel-0|4> sending packet: from 192.0.2.1[500] to 192.0.2.2[500] (244 bytes)
Jun 9 19:57:38 r4-1 charon: 05[NET] <peer-192.0.2.2-tunnel-0|4> received packet: from 192.0.2.2[500] to 192.0.2.1[500] (244 bytes)
Jun 9 19:57:38 r4-1 charon: 05[ENC] <peer-192.0.2.2-tunnel-0|4> parsed ID_PROT response 0 [ KE No NAT-D NAT-D ]
Jun 9 19:57:38 r4-1 charon: 05[ENC] <peer-192.0.2.2-tunnel-0|4> generating ID_PROT request 0 [ ID HASH N(INITIAL_CONTACT) ]
Jun 9 19:57:38 r4-1 charon: 05[NET] <peer-192.0.2.2-tunnel-0|4> sending packet: from 192.0.2.1[500] to 192.0.2.2[500] (108 bytes)
Jun 9 19:57:38 r4-1 charon: 08[NET] <peer-192.0.2.2-tunnel-0|4> received packet: from 192.0.2.2[500] to 192.0.2.1[500] (76 bytes)
Jun 9 19:57:38 r4-1 charon: 08[ENC] <peer-192.0.2.2-tunnel-0|4> parsed ID_PROT response 0 [ ID HASH ]
Jun 9 19:57:38 r4-1 charon: 08[IKE] <peer-192.0.2.2-tunnel-0|4> IKE_SA peer-192.0.2.2-tunnel-0[4] established between 192.0.2.1[192.0.2.1]...192.0.2.2[192.0.2.2]
Jun 9 19:57:38 r4-1 charon: 08[IKE] <peer-192.0.2.2-tunnel-0|4> scheduling reauthentication in 2524s
Jun 9 19:57:38 r4-1 charon: 08[IKE] <peer-192.0.2.2-tunnel-0|4> maximum IKE_SA lifetime 3064s
Jun 9 19:57:38 r4-1 charon: 08[ENC] <peer-192.0.2.2-tunnel-0|4> generating QUICK_MODE request 364019988 [ HASH SA No KE ID ID ]
Jun 9 19:57:38 r4-1 charon: 08[NET] <peer-192.0.2.2-tunnel-0|4> sending packet: from 192.0.2.1[500] to 192.0.2.2[500] (316 bytes)
Jun 9 19:57:38 r4-1 charon: 09[NET] <peer-192.0.2.2-tunnel-0|4> received packet: from 192.0.2.2[500] to 192.0.2.1[500] (316 bytes)
Jun 9 19:57:38 r4-1 charon: 09[ENC] <peer-192.0.2.2-tunnel-0|4> parsed QUICK_MODE response 364019988 [ HASH SA No KE ID ID ]
Jun 9 19:57:38 r4-1 charon: 09[CFG] <peer-192.0.2.2-tunnel-0|4> selected proposal: ESP:AES_CBC_256/HMAC_SHA1_96/MODP_1024/NO_EXT_SEQ
Jun 9 19:57:38 r4-1 charon: 09[IKE] <peer-192.0.2.2-tunnel-0|4> CHILD_SA peer-192.0.2.2-tunnel-0{1} established with SPIs cb0aa83a_i c728156c_o and TS 10.1.0.0/24 === 10.2.3.0/24
Jun 9 19:57:38 r4-1 charon: 09[ENC] <peer-192.0.2.2-tunnel-0|4> generating QUICK_MODE request 364019988 [ HASH ]
Jun 9 19:57:38 r4-1 charon: 09[NET] <peer-192.0.2.2-tunnel-0|4> sending packet: from 192.0.2.1[500] to 192.0.2.2[500] (60 bytes)
vyos@r4-1.3:~$Ok it already fixed in 1.3 T2916 and can be migrated to crux
In T2855#95665, @Viacheslav wrote:I can't reproduce it in 1.2.7
Jun 8 2021
This is resolved for 1.4. Do you still have this problem in 1.3 as of RC4? If so, I'll need to backport the changes.
Jun 7 2021
PR https://github.com/vyos/vyos-build/pull/169
Jun 8 00:59:20 r1-roll ipsec_starter[2373]: charon (2374) started after 400 ms
Jun 8 00:59:20 r1-roll charon: 05[CFG] received stroke: add connection 'peer-192.0.2.2-tunnel-0'
Jun 8 00:59:20 r1-roll charon: 05[CFG] added configuration 'peer-192.0.2.2-tunnel-0'
Jun 8 00:59:20 r1-roll charon: 07[CFG] received stroke: initiate 'peer-192.0.2.2-tunnel-0'
Jun 8 00:59:20 r1-roll charon: 07[IKE] <peer-192.0.2.2-tunnel-0|1> initiating Main Mode IKE_SA peer-192.0.2.2-tunnel-0[1] to 192.0.2.2
Jun 8 00:59:20 r1-roll charon: 07[ENC] <peer-192.0.2.2-tunnel-0|1> generating ID_PROT request 0 [ SA V V V V V ]
Jun 8 00:59:20 r1-roll charon: 07[NET] <peer-192.0.2.2-tunnel-0|1> sending packet: from 192.0.2.1[500] to 192.0.2.2[500] (180 bytes)
Jun 8 00:59:20 r1-roll charon: 09[NET] <peer-192.0.2.2-tunnel-0|1> received packet: from 192.0.2.2[500] to 192.0.2.1[500] (160 bytes)
Jun 8 00:59:20 r1-roll charon: 09[ENC] <peer-192.0.2.2-tunnel-0|1> parsed ID_PROT response 0 [ SA V V V V ]
Jun 8 00:59:20 r1-roll charon: 09[IKE] <peer-192.0.2.2-tunnel-0|1> received XAuth vendor ID
Jun 8 00:59:20 r1-roll charon: 09[IKE] <peer-192.0.2.2-tunnel-0|1> received DPD vendor ID
Jun 8 00:59:20 r1-roll charon: 09[IKE] <peer-192.0.2.2-tunnel-0|1> received FRAGMENTATION vendor ID
Jun 8 00:59:20 r1-roll charon: 09[IKE] <peer-192.0.2.2-tunnel-0|1> received NAT-T (RFC 3947) vendor ID
Jun 8 00:59:20 r1-roll charon: 09[CFG] <peer-192.0.2.2-tunnel-0|1> selected proposal: IKE:AES_CBC_256/HMAC_SHA1_96/PRF_HMAC_SHA1/MODP_1024
Jun 8 00:59:20 r1-roll charon: 09[ENC] <peer-192.0.2.2-tunnel-0|1> generating ID_PROT request 0 [ KE No NAT-D NAT-D ]
Jun 8 00:59:20 r1-roll charon: 09[NET] <peer-192.0.2.2-tunnel-0|1> sending packet: from 192.0.2.1[500] to 192.0.2.2[500] (244 bytes)
Jun 8 00:59:20 r1-roll charon: 10[NET] <peer-192.0.2.2-tunnel-0|1> received packet: from 192.0.2.2[500] to 192.0.2.1[500] (244 bytes)
Jun 8 00:59:20 r1-roll charon: 10[ENC] <peer-192.0.2.2-tunnel-0|1> parsed ID_PROT response 0 [ KE No NAT-D NAT-D ]
Jun 8 00:59:20 r1-roll charon: 10[ENC] <peer-192.0.2.2-tunnel-0|1> generating ID_PROT request 0 [ ID HASH N(INITIAL_CONTACT) ]
Jun 8 00:59:20 r1-roll charon: 10[NET] <peer-192.0.2.2-tunnel-0|1> sending packet: from 192.0.2.1[500] to 192.0.2.2[500] (108 bytes)
Jun 8 00:59:20 r1-roll charon: 11[NET] <peer-192.0.2.2-tunnel-0|1> received packet: from 192.0.2.2[500] to 192.0.2.1[500] (76 bytes)
Jun 8 00:59:20 r1-roll charon: 11[ENC] <peer-192.0.2.2-tunnel-0|1> parsed ID_PROT response 0 [ ID HASH ]
Jun 8 00:59:20 r1-roll charon: 11[IKE] <peer-192.0.2.2-tunnel-0|1> IKE_SA peer-192.0.2.2-tunnel-0[1] established between 192.0.2.1[192.0.2.1]...192.0.2.2[192.0.2.2]
Jun 8 00:59:20 r1-roll charon: 11[IKE] <peer-192.0.2.2-tunnel-0|1> scheduling rekeying in 2720s
Jun 8 00:59:20 r1-roll charon: 11[IKE] <peer-192.0.2.2-tunnel-0|1> maximum IKE_SA lifetime 3260s
Jun 8 00:59:20 r1-roll charon: 11[ENC] <peer-192.0.2.2-tunnel-0|1> generating QUICK_MODE request 3783917425 [ HASH SA No KE ID ID ]
Jun 8 00:59:20 r1-roll charon: 11[NET] <peer-192.0.2.2-tunnel-0|1> sending packet: from 192.0.2.1[500] to 192.0.2.2[500] (316 bytes)
Jun 8 00:59:20 r1-roll charon: 12[NET] <peer-192.0.2.2-tunnel-0|1> received packet: from 192.0.2.2[500] to 192.0.2.1[500] (316 bytes)
Jun 8 00:59:20 r1-roll charon: 12[ENC] <peer-192.0.2.2-tunnel-0|1> parsed QUICK_MODE response 3783917425 [ HASH SA No KE ID ID ]
Jun 8 00:59:20 r1-roll charon: 12[CFG] <peer-192.0.2.2-tunnel-0|1> selected proposal: ESP:AES_CBC_256/HMAC_SHA1_96/MODP_1024/NO_EXT_SEQ
Jun 8 00:59:20 r1-roll charon: 12[IKE] <peer-192.0.2.2-tunnel-0|1> CHILD_SA peer-192.0.2.2-tunnel-0{1} established with SPIs c4d940b7_i c9a69e83_o and TS 10.1.0.0/24 === 10.2.3.0/24
Jun 8 00:59:20 r1-roll charon: 12[ENC] <peer-192.0.2.2-tunnel-0|1> generating QUICK_MODE request 3783917425 [ HASH ]
Jun 8 00:59:20 r1-roll charon: 12[NET] <peer-192.0.2.2-tunnel-0|1> sending packet: from 192.0.2.1[500] to 192.0.2.2[500] (60 bytes)