Illegal Parameter Number in Definition of Test. N L.73 End{itemize}

Duco Ergo Sum

Hi in that location,

For the past week and a scrap I accept been trying to connect to my function VPN, without success. The instructions for connecting presume the client is a Windows 7 organization.

The vpn is "IPSec (L2TP/IPSEC)" using a Pre-Shared Key.

For the purpose of this mail I will use faux details and values:

gateway: vpn.function.com
PSK: vpn-role-com
username: your-login-username
password: your-login-countersign
domain (optional): office-proper noun

What I have tried and so far, includes:

compiled every IPSEC kernel module -> No observable difference.

KVPN -> Gives an mistake racoon config error and then a long list of other debug info which as information technology is security related I don't want mail service indiscriminately.

VPNC -> reports "No responce from target"
Cisco and regular UPD
I have tried setting various ports to use, 47, l, 51, 443, 500, 1701, 1723, 10000

Strongswan -> the demon starts merely I cannot find evidence of a connection
ipsec.conf and ipsec.secret configured for the above details respectively.

I tin can only guess that this isn't a firewall consequence as a colleague who already connects to the vpn can only do then using a virtual machine running Windows 7. My colleague says this is because of
firewall and routing problems from his Linux desktop. My assertion beingness that the virtual machines has to pass through the host and any other firewall in his network.

Please assistance...

salahx · Guru Joined: 12 Mar 2005 Posts: 499

I wrote a Gentoo wiki commodity covering setting up the server side of it: https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/IPsec_L2TP_VPN_server . Because all the protocols (ipsec, lt2p and pppd) are peer-to-peer, configuring information technology on the customer side has a lot of similarities.

Duco Ergo Sum · Amateur Joined: 06 Dec 2005 Posts: 154 Location: Winsford

Give thanks yous.

I think what I need is the "Ipsec ID" (grouping id/name) parameter. I have a working Windows organization at present then I'll interrogate that.

Duco Ergo Sum · Posted: Mon Aug 25, 2014 ten:20 pm Post subject:

This is actually frustrating.

I now have:

VPNC which times out without much indication of annihilation happening.
StrongSwan which starts just I don't see whatsoever sign of a VPN nor take I found a way to test it.
OpenL2TP which I've had to install an overlay (booboo) to get. This doesn't seem to be able to initiate sessions, tunnel id not found, while tunnel testify - shows the tunnel I configured.
NetworkManager seems to allow a sub-set of functionality in its configuration of different sub-systems simply information technology protests that its unable to find an agent when I try to offset a session.

Additionally, I've experimented with Windows. The initial setup is catchy merely the VPN works. No additional information needed. With security in mind I'thousand sure, they've hidden the config details from prying optics thus thwarting my plan to find the IP Sec ID there.

I am beginning to question if it this is a propriety MS VPN implementation or could my system be just missing ane niggling screw somewhere?

I have read the IPsec L2TP VPN server wiki page and attempted to adapt its wisdom to my needs just unfortunately unsuccessfully.

Please tell me how I can test a VPN connectedness, merely to see if information technology exists?

--
You know you lot really need aid when the voices tell y'all that you're becoming obsessed!

salahx · Guru Joined: 12 Mar 2005 Posts: 499

The kickoff, and most dificult layer, is the ipsec layer. Here's a simple config file you tin can suit. As the wiki page show, uncomment the "include" line at the very bottom of /etc/ipsec.conf and create a /etc/ipsec.d/office.vpn.com.conf with content similar to the following:

Duco Ergo Sum · Posted: Thu Aug 28, 2014 12:48 am Post bailiwick:

Howdy Salahx,

Thanks for over again answering, I am very grateful.

The command 'ipsec up vpnclient' has been about illustrative. StrongSwan doesn't get a response from the part network either.

salahx · Guru Joined: 12 Mar 2005 Posts: 499

Its seeing SOMETHING on the other side, its just having problem negotiating with information technology. It appears its trying to negoitate an IKEv2 connection, but we want IKEv1.

So lets tweak the config a bit:

Duco Ergo Sum · Posted: Thu Aug 28, 2014 8:49 am Post subject:

Thanks.

We're making progress, new response message:

Duco Ergo Sum · Posted: Thu Aug 28, 2014 9:12 am Postal service subject:

Looking in Windows

Control Panel - Administrative Tools - Windows Firewall with Advanced Security - Windows Firewall Properites (IPsec Settings) - Customize IPsec Defaults (Primal exchange (Main Mode) - Advanced [Customize]) - Customize Avant-garde Central Exchange Settings

salahx · Guru Joined: 12 Mar 2005 Posts: 499

Its "pfs=no" not "psf=no". It doesn't matter anyway because the command is ignored under strongSwan and "no" is the default. You lot shouldn't demand the "esp=des-sha1-modp1024" as it should choose the correct method during proffer process. In fact that will negotate PFS which is Non what you want - Microsoft's IKEv1 daemon doesn't support PFS.

Note that Windows has 2 implementations of ipsec: the IKEv1 one used for l2tp tunnel, and and IKEv2 ane which is controlled via the ipsec snap-in. The windows Firewall and other ipsec settings refer to the latter, simply we want to apply the former.

Duco Ergo Sum · Amateur Joined: 06 Dec 2005 Posts: 154 Location: Winsford

Apologies, "psf" was a typo.

All the same, at present mater how I try to configure the pfs pick, I get the aforementioned result.

salahx · Guru Joined: 12 Mar 2005 Posts: 499

pfs option is ignored in strongSwan anyway. But that "esp" line has to exist removed, considering i know its wrong. If the server However won't take whatsoever proposals offered by strongswan, even without the "esp" line there an "ike-browse" bundle in portage that should give some information on what proposals the gateway will accept.

Duco Ergo Sum · Posted: Fri Aug 29, 2014 8:45 am Postal service subject field:

Hi,

I take used IKE-Scan which prompted me to change my Config as below and this has generated the follow information.

ike-scan output

salahx · Guru Joined: 12 Mar 2005 Posts: 499

OK now its accepting the proposal only its having problem with the PSK. It probably has to exercise with how the VPN server is ideifying itself. So lets change the secrets file to

Duco Ergo Sum · Posted: Fri Aug 29, 2014 9:51 pm Post subject field:

Awesome! Thanks!

salahx · Guru Joined: 12 Mar 2005 Posts: 499

Were almost in that location, simply were not there nevertheless. This goes back with "how the server is identifty itself" problem with the PSK: Instead of identify itself via its name (vpn.example.com), information technology does so past its IP accost (17.eleven.7.5).

Nosotros just need to brand one tweak:

Duco Ergo Sum · Posted: Sat Aug 30, 2014 5:21 pm Mail service subject:

Perfect, next pace L2TP!

Duco Ergo Sum · Posted: Sabbatum Aug 30, 2014 10:04 pm Post subject field:

I thought this might happen.

/etc/xl2tp/xl2tpd.conf

salahx · Guru Joined: 12 Mar 2005 Posts: 499

Configuring an l2tp the customer is a different that the server - thakfully client side is even easier:

The /etc/xl2tpd/xl2tpd.conf is even simpler then the server one:

Duco Ergo Sum · Posted: Sun Aug 31, 2014 eleven:58 pm Post subject:

Hi,

I take now tried a number of variations on a theme. Mostly where vpn.office.com could mean the url vpn.office.com or the ipsec connection name VPN.Office.COM, capitalise to accent the distinciton
of these two roles. As well with and without Role-NAME\\login-name login-password and in combination with including excluding options.xl2tpd.client.

/etc/xl2tpd/xl2tpd.conf

salahx · Guru Joined: 12 Mar 2005 Posts: 499

xl2tpd and strongswan are unconnect, thus the "lns" value in the LAC section is but the server's domain proper noun or IP accost. In this case though, its non seeing the L2TP LNS (server) on the other side . This usually ways the ipsec tunnel is down. Check and restart the tunnel if needed.

To run across if data is going over the tunnel:

Duco Ergo Sum · Posted: Tue Sep 02, 2014 nine:09 am Postal service subject:

Hi,

I have tried diversity configurations of xl2tp. Just to add to the confusion my mobo has two lan ports and wifi, I fearfulness now this feature is coming back to confuse me and my set-up. 'eno1' is the lan port which is would be eth0 and is currently the only operational network connection in this machine.

It appears that tcpdump is looking at 'bond0' and so not finding anything. Could xl2tp be doing the aforementioned?

tcpdump -i eno1 produces the same output as below.

Make connection

salahx · Guru Joined: 12 Mar 2005 Posts: 499

We're making progress. According to the log, it seeing the l2tp server on the other end. That ways the ipsec is up and configurated properly, and traffic is flowing across information technology..Now the problem is pppd. pppd is getting some extraneous options from somewhere. Namely, the nonexistent "/etc/ppp/options.l2tpd.lns" is causing pppd to get out. Nonetheless information technology shouldn't even be looking for that.

Very little configuration should be needed on the l2tp side,, but there may exist one tweak we need:

Duco Ergo Sum · Amateur Joined: 06 Dec 2005 Posts: 154 Location: Winsford

I discovered a typo in the /etc/ppp/options.xl2tpd.client path namely the missing '10'. As well I accept added the user proper name as you lot have brash and no joy.

salahx · Guru Joined: 12 Mar 2005 Posts: 499

The proper noun used for the lac isn't important. Its non seeing the l2tp server again. Be sure the strongSwan connectedness is up, and try again. If it still won'r piece of work, stop strongswan and xl2tp, in some other windows exercise a "ip xfrm monitor", starts strongswan and xl2tpd. Connect via strongSwan and the window "ip xfrm monitor" should display some stuff. Make a connectedness with xl2tpd-connect and more than stuff volition appear in the other window (warning: this control outputs the secrets keys for the ipsec connectedness. The real keys have been replaced with 0's)

Something like this:

Illegal Parameter Number in Definition of Test. N L.73 End{itemize}

0 Response to "Illegal Parameter Number in Definition of Test. N L.73 End{itemize}"

Post a Comment

Iklan Atas Artikel

Iklan Tengah Artikel 1

Iklan Tengah Artikel 2

Iklan Bawah Artikel