Hi. Sorry for extremely slow reply!
Did you add the return routes for your internal subnets into each of the
per-tun rdomains?
To test your tunnels are setup correctly;
Once you have the external interface in rdomain 0, and each VPN instance's
tun interface is bound to different rdomains etc, you
Trying to replicate same setup with pairs and different rdomains for each tun
and also external interface, after a packet goes through pair interfaces
it's just disapears.
Any ideas?
routing in rdomain is set like:
route -T add default tun
route -T add
--
Sent from:
Hi,
So for completeness, I did some more testing with your suggestions.
First I tried using different nexthop’s in each of the interface-nexthop pairs
in the route-to pool (as the next hop doesn’t really matter with p2p
interfaces). And it did start to work! :)
But after some more testing it
Sorry the "here" I was referring to earlier was "here" as shown below
https://lab.rickauer.com/post/2017/07/16/OpenBSD-rtables-and-rdomains
> Howdy...
> starting Openvpn in different rdomains works pretty well for us
>
> a crude way of doing that ... is to add the following line to the
>
Howdy...
starting Openvpn in different rdomains works pretty well for us
a crude way of doing that ... is to add the following line to the
bottom of your tun interface...
(starting openvpn in rdomain2 )
!/sbin/route -T 2 exec /usr/local/sbin/openvpn --config
/etc/openvpn2.conf & /usr/bin/false
At a guess, route-to is confused by the same ip, but I haven't looked at the
internals.
Maybe try adding pair interfaces (with different addresses) to each rdomain,
and you can use route-to to select between them.
You already have default route set in each rdomain, so it will find its way
from
Hi,
So using the information Stuart and Andreas provided, I have been testing
this (load balancing across multiple VPN servers to improve bandwidth).
And I have multiple VPNs working properly within there own rdomains.
* However 'route-to' is not load balancing with rdomains :(
I have not been
On 2018-09-11, Andrew Lemin wrote:
> Hi list,
>
> I use an OpenVPN based internet access service (like NordVPN, AirVPN etc).
>
> The issue with these public VPN services, is the VPN servers are always
> congested. The most I’ll get is maybe 10Mbits through one server.
>
> Local connection is a
Hi Andreas,
Thanks for your reply. Sorry I should have been more clear.
I know that rdomains are the correct method with overlapping addressing.
The challenge is that I cannot figure out how to get openvpn to initialise it’s
resulting tunX interface directly into the correct rdomain?
You
Maybe rdomains?
> Den 11. sep. 2018 kl. 15.59 skrev Andrew Lemin :
>
> Hi list,
>
> I use an OpenVPN based internet access service (like NordVPN, AirVPN etc).
>
> The issue with these public VPN services, is the VPN servers are always
> congested. The most I’ll get is maybe 10Mbits through
Hi list,
I use an OpenVPN based internet access service (like NordVPN, AirVPN etc).
The issue with these public VPN services, is the VPN servers are always
congested. The most I’ll get is maybe 10Mbits through one server.
Local connection is a few hundred mbps..
So I had the idea of running
11 matches
Mail list logo
