[ previous ] [ next ] [ threads ]
 
 From:  "Elijah Savage" <esavage at digitalrage dot org>
 To:  "Claude Morin" <klodefactor at gmail dot com>
 Cc:  <m0n0wall at lists dot m0n0 dot ch>
 Subject:  RE: [m0n0wall] Monowall to Cisco VPN
 Date:  Wed, 2 Mar 2005 19:00:47 -0500
Claude,

I guess I am not being clear enough but I will try my best :). The
largest packet I can send across the tunnel is 1490. I have tried it
with traffic shaping turned of and turned on and to make sure I have
actually rebooted the box in between each session change, which I know
is not needed. On the outside is a Cisco 2950 so no need for a hub I
actually span the port and used sniffer pro on my laptop to look at the
traffic and use ethereal to look at he same traffic to see any
differences and of course there are none. Also for what it is worth I am
a CCNP and have passed the CCIE written and preparing to take the lab
soon I hope, so yes I have turned on debugging on the Cisco side and
because the tunnel is established and traffic flows just not big
traffic. I have not debugged ip packet because that can over run the
router cpu plus it would not show me anymore than what the sniffer
would.

Claude those are all good recommendations and I do appreciate your help
and a second set of eyes looking at it.

-----Original Message-----
From: Claude Morin [mailto:klodefactor at gmail dot com] 
Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2005 1:00 PM
To: Elijah Savage
Cc: m0n0wall at lists dot m0n0 dot ch
Subject: Re: [m0n0wall] Monowall to Cisco VPN

At this point it's probably best to do something like:

        m0n0wall-----hub**-----Internet-----Cisco831
                            |
                        sniffer
                           PC

and watch, packet by packet, to confirm what's missing, and from which
end.  For sniffing, I use Ethereal pretty much exclusively these days;
it's supported on many platforms, including MS Windows.

Elijah: you say that pings across the tunnel work.  Can you confirm that
they *don't* work if you use the "-l NNNN" option to send larger than
normal ping packets?

Regarding the lack of log information on the endpoints: you should be
able to activate VPN debugging on the Cisco side at least.  I haven't
played with that particular subset of the debugging functionality, but
for PPP, ISDN, etc., Cisco's detailed debugging messages have saved me
several times.  Just remember to do "no debug all" when you're done, or
your logs will grow pretty quickly :-)

Silly question: have you tried these tests with traffic shaping on the
m0n0wall disabled?  I took a quick look at your earlier messages and
didn't see an answer...

-klode

** For the less experienced people following this discussion: it's
important to use a true hub in the pictured configuration, not a
dual-speed hub unless you're sure all three devices are communicating at
the same speed, and definitely not a switch.  Otherwise, the sniffer PC
won't see the traffic between the m0n0wall and the Internet.

On Wed, 2 Mar 2005 07:25:59 -0500, Elijah Savage
<esavage at digitalrage dot org> wrote:
> The tunnel from the monowall is not being built to a pix, I replace 
> monowall on my end with a pix sorry for the confusion. The tunnels are

> being built from monowall to a bunch of different Cisco routers 2600, 
> 3600, and 831's. I see nothing on either end in the logs. I know it 
> does not seem like a MTU issue but I truly believe it is and I think 
> it has something to do with ICMP being blocked maybe, and the ICMP 
> request telling the pc to fragment is not being sent possibly at least

> I never see it in the sniffer logs.