Date: Sat, 4 Jul 2020 14:46:31 -0400 From: Kurt Hackenberg <kh@panix.com> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Routing IP traffic from client through server openvpn tunnel? Message-ID: <97e2cbc5-c8af-eaf3-d0bd-4218421958af@panix.com> In-Reply-To: <20200704133607.GA91599@rancor.immure.com> References: <20200704133607.GA91599@rancor.immure.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 2020-07-04 09:36, Bob Willcox wrote: > My FreeBSD gateway system has an openvpn tunnel connected to my Son's network > and when logged into the gateway system we can access his network throught the > tunnel just fine. But from other systems in my network it doesn't work. The > packets get over to the gateway system (maul) but no further. > > This is the routing table on my gateway system: > > Internet: > Destination Gateway Flags Netif Expire > default 108.84.10.14 UGS igb0 > 10.1.132.0/23 link#2 U em0 > 10.1.132.1 link#2 UHS lo0 > 10.4.0.1 link#4 UH tun0 > 10.4.0.2 link#4 UHS lo0 > 108.84.10.8/29 link#1 U igb0 > 108.84.10.9 link#1 UHS lo0 > 108.84.10.13 link#1 UHS lo0 > 127.0.0.1 link#3 UH lo0 > 192.168.2.0/24 10.4.0.1 UGS tun0 > > Here's a traceroute from the gateway system: > > bob@maul:2> traceroute 192.168.2.19 > traceroute to 192.168.2.19 (192.168.2.19), 64 hops max, 40 byte packets > 1 coovas.knighthammer.com (10.4.0.1) 55.347 ms 53.420 ms 55.786 ms > 2 192.168.2.19 (192.168.2.19) 50.291 ms 48.516 ms 55.858 ms > > And here is one from one of my other systems: > > bob@han:1> traceroute 192.168.2.19 > traceroute to 192.168.2.19 (192.168.2.19), 64 hops max, 40 byte packets > 1 maul (10.1.132.1) 0.261 ms 0.256 ms 0.244 ms > 2 * * * > 3 * * * > > So my question is, what am I missing (likely on the gateway system) that would > prevent the packets from other systems being routed to the tunnel? Well, the subnet masks of network 10 look a little strange to me. What's the subnet mask of the tunnel (10.4.0.0)? Remember that network 10 is class A, default mask /8. Also, 10.1.132.0/23? Not /24, or /16? Also, I'm not sure it works to have different subnet masks on different subnets of an IP network. At least, it's more straightforward to make them all the same, and net 10 has plenty of address space to do that.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?97e2cbc5-c8af-eaf3-d0bd-4218421958af>