[ previous ] [ next ] [ threads ]
 From:  "James W. McKeand" <james at mckeand dot biz>
 To:  <m0n0wall at lists dot m0n0 dot ch>
 Subject:  RE: [m0n0wall] ipsec
 Date:  Wed, 17 Nov 2004 10:37:13 -0500
I do not claim to be an expert on IPSEC or routing, but I would guess
that adding a static route on net1 to net2 via net3 and a static route
on net2 to net1 via net3 would do the trick. For the routes I think
the interface would be LAN, destination network would be netx, and
gateway would be net3. My assumption is that net1 will only talk to
net3 and net2 will only talk to net3 via the respective IPSEC tunnels.

If my assumption is false. Then creating a tunnel from net1 to net2 is
your only option. In this scenario, each m0n0 will use the appropriate
tunnel to route traffic to the appropriate destination network. This
may be the better choice, because of the load on net3 (everything from
net1 going to net2 has to go through net3).

James W. McKeand

-----Original Message-----
From: spiv007 [mailto:spiv007 at gmail dot com] 
Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 2004 10:14 AM
To: m0n0wall at lists dot m0n0 dot ch
Subject: [m0n0wall] ipsec

I have 3 locations, 3 different network what is the best way to get
all 3 sites to see each other?

So far Im using ipsec  like this;     net3
                                                    /       \
                                                 net1    net2

then once that is done i was thinking to route the traffice from net1
to net2 thru net3 and net2 goes through net3 to get to net1.

I guess i could get connect net1 and net together via ipsec.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: m0n0wall dash unsubscribe at lists dot m0n0 dot ch
For additional commands, e-mail: m0n0wall dash help at lists dot m0n0 dot ch