[OpenVPN home] [Date Prev] [Date Index] [Date Next]
[OpenVPN mailing lists] [Thread Prev] [Thread Index] [Thread Next]
Google
 
Web openvpn.net

Re: [Openvpn-users] problem with server mode



Title: Re: [Openvpn-users] problem with server mode
Of course. Because it overlaps with the eth0 network.
As pointed out for the third time now.


From: Canhua [mailto:dreameration@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Mon 10-Sep-07 10:13
To: David Balazic; openvpn-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [Openvpn-users] problem with server mode

On 9/10/07, David Balazic <David.Balazic@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> You have the address 10.137.0.2 assigned to two interfaces. That can't work.
> Also the overlapping network addresses ...
Yes. However, I found that even when there is no pptpd client assigned
by pptpd the address of 10.137.0.2, and 10.137.0.2 is owned by only
openvpn client, the network still failed to work.
> Maybe it's it time to give a big link to some routing basics on the
> homepage.
> 80% of all problems here are routing problems, not vpn problems...
You're right, I am quite confused with routing.
>  From: openvpn-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx on
> behalf of Canhua
> Sent: Mon 10-Sep-07 08:41
> To: Daniel L. Miller; openvpn-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [Openvpn-users] problem with server mode
>
>
>
>
> On 9/10/07, Daniel L. Miller <dmiller@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Canhua wrote:
> > > Kernel IP routing table
> > > Destination     Gateway         Genmask         Flags Metric Ref    Use
> Iface
> > > 10.137.0.17     *               255.255.255.255 UH    0      0        0
> ppp5
> > > 10.137.0.15     *               255.255.255.255 UH    0      0        0
> ppp9
> > > 10.137.0.14     *               255.255.255.255 UH    0      0        0
> ppp0
> > > 10.137.0.13     *               255.255.255.255 UH    0      0        0
> ppp15
> > > 10.137.0.12     *               255.255.255.255 UH    0      0        0
> ppp6
> > > 10.137.0.10     *               255.255.255.255 UH    0      0        0
> ppp2
> > > 10.137.0.9      *               255.255.255.255 UH    0      0        0
> ppp3
> > > 10.137.0.8      *               255.255.255.255 UH    0      0        0
> ppp8
> > > 10.137.0.7      *               255.255.255.255 UH    0      0        0
> ppp4
> > > 10.137.0.6      *               255.255.255.255 UH    0      0        0
> ppp11
> > > 10.137.0.5      *               255.255.255.255 UH    0      0        0
> ppp1
> > > 10.137.0.4      *               255.255.255.255 UH    0      0        0
> ppp12
> > > 10.137.0.3      *               255.255.255.255 UH    0      0        0
> ppp7
> > > 10.137.0.2      *               255.255.255.255 UH    0      0        0
> tun0
> > > 10.137.0.2      *               255.255.255.255 UH    0      0        0
> ppp10
> > > *.*.0.0      *               255.255.0.0     U     0      0        0
> eth0
> > > link-local      *               255.255.0.0     U     0      0        0
> eth1
> > > 10.137.0.0      *               255.255.0.0     U     0      0        0
> eth1
> > > loopback        *               255.0.0.0       U     0      0        0
> lo
> > > default         *.*.*.*  0.0.0.0         UG    0      0        0 eth0
> > > (Note: there is already a pptp vpn server on this server machine.)
> > >
> > >>
> > I'm less than a novice at routing - but it looks like you've got
> > overlapping ranges between your overall 10.137.0.0/24 network and your
> > ppp networks.  Just for fun, may I suggest you choose a completely
> > different IP base, like 10.13.0.0/24 or something, just to guarantee
> > there's no overlap with your ppp?
> I tried p2p mode and succeded: I used "ifconfig 10.137.0.1
> 10.137.0.100" on the server side and used "ifconfig 10.137.0.100
> 10.137.0.1" on the client side, and I could ping other machine on the
> subnet of the server side from the client. The problem is when I use
> server mode instead I just failed to make the VPN tunnel work. Why?
>