EC Add an additional Phase 2 entry on each set of tunnels:
pf2 -> pf1 = tunnel A pf2 -> pf3 = tunnel B Add a Phase 2 on tunnel A for local 192.168.40/24 to remote 192.168.44/24 Add a Phase 2 on tunnel B for local 192.168.44/24 to remote 192.168.40/24 Add firewall rules to taste. Cheers Jon On Tue, 2017-05-02 at 17:45 -0400, Eleuterio Contracampo wrote: > Hello everyone, > > I have the following setup: > > PFsense1 (LAN1: 192.168.40.0/24) > PFsense2 (LAN2: 192.168.41.0/24) > PFSense3 (LAN3: 192.168.44.0/24) > > I've got two MPLS lines connecting PFSense2<->PFSense1<->PFSense3 > (PFSense1 > is the center of the star topology). I use IPSec tunnels on top of > MPLS > links. > > I'm able to get from LAN1 to LAN2 and from LAN1 to LAN3 via IPSec > tunnels. > > I need to make LAN2 and LAN3 visible to each other. Is it possible to > do it > via IPSec links? > > I've tried adding an additional Phase 2 entry at PFSense1 posing as > if LAN3 > were local, and adding the corresponding Phase 2 entry at PFSense2 to > tell > LAN2 to route packets destined to LAN3 via that newly added Phase 2 > sub-tunnel against PFSense1. Packets do arrive to PFSense1 but don't > progress any further despite having static routes indicating howto > get to > LAN3. I hope I'm clear about the problem. > > If it were not possible to do it via IPSec routing, is there any > other > solution different than NAT+static routes? > > Thanks in advance! > -EC > _______________________________________________ > pfSense mailing list > https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list > Support the project with Gold! https://pfsense.org/gold _______________________________________________ pfSense mailing list https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list Support the project with Gold! https://pfsense.org/gold
