On Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 2:46 PM, BSD Wiz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
With 1.2 is it possible to connect to pfsense boxes on the same subnet via
an ipsec tunnel? Both boxes wan interfaces are private ip's.
No, need different subnets.
Scott
On Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 2:59 PM, BSD Wiz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
To be clear, both boxes lans are different subnet of course but the WANs are
on the same subnets.
That might work. Give it a shot.
Scott
-
To unsubscribe,
So your saying that the wan interfaces on the boxes need diff subnets?
-Phil G
On Oct 14, 2008, at 1:49 PM, Scott Ullrich [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 2:46 PM, BSD Wiz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
With 1.2 is it possible to connect to pfsense boxes on the same
subnet
On Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 2:59 PM, BSD Wiz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
To be clear, both boxes lans are different subnet of course but the WANs are
on the same subnets.
If they're on the same ISP with privately addressed WANs that will
work, if they allow routing between customers. If it's two
it's on my corporate network, both wan interfaces of the pfsense box
are on the same private ip subnet. we built 2 labs using pfsense and
now we want to connect the two labs. i haven't had any luck getting
them to work yet...
the reason i've asked the question is because i have several site
Is there a particular reason you need this traffic to be encapsulated?
At first blush, this would seem to be a pretty standard routing problem,
easily solvable with static routes. Unless there's some very specific
reason for needing the encryption.
-Gary
BSD Wiz wrote:
it's on my corporate
yes, there are reasons and it must be encrypted.
thanks,
-phil
On Oct 14, 2008, at 5:11 PM, Gary Buckmaster wrote:
Is there a particular reason you need this traffic to be
encapsulated? At first blush, this would seem to be a pretty
standard routing problem, easily solvable with