[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Freeswan (CentOS 4.5)



--- tony chamberlain lemko com wrote:

> 
> 
> Has anyone had experience with Freeswan?
> 
> We have a situation where say there is a Linux machine in City 1 with IP address 10.0.0.10 (for
> example)
> and a Linux machine in City 2 with an IP address of 10.0.0.20 (for example). Now these machines
> are
> in different cities, so machine 1 cannot just open a socket on 10.0.0.20 because machine 2 is on
> a different
> network. Each machine does have a router, say City 1 is 65.15.47.28 (for example). To get into
> City 1from
> outside the network you go through thr router, use 65.15.47.28 which routes into the LAN. The
> same for
> City 2. For a unix process on 10.0.0.10 to send to 10.0.0.20 it would have to send to
> 65.15.47.28 which would route
> it in. Problem is, its from address would be 10.0.0.10, which the machine at 10.0.0.20 wouldn't
> know about.
> A process on 10.0.0.20 would have to do something similar to respond.
> 
> Now these machines have to actually be able to use each others' 10.0.0.X addresses. I assume
> this is possible
> via a VPN. They don't have any Cicsco VPNs or anything, and they asked whether it is possible
> just using
> Linux (CentOS) to set up a VPN. I did a bit of searching and found a couple things. Freeswan
> seemed to be
> the most promising, though other packages could be just as good.
> 
> Is the above scenario possible with Freeswan or can you recommend some other way?
> 
> 
> Thanks
> 
Wouldn't port fowarding work here?

-Max


      ____________________________________________________________________________________
Never miss a thing.  Make Yahoo your home page. 
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]