Hi Tilak,

first a few comments on your ipsec.conf file:

>config setup
>       interfaces="ipsec0=eth0"

The interfaces options is for the FreeS/WAN KLIPS
IPsec stack and is completely obsolete

>       klipsdebug=all
>       plutodebug=all

These debug options are for the IKEv1 pluto daemon
and not relevant for debugging IKEv2. Rather choose

        plutostart=no

to disable pluto.

conn jay1
        ...
        auth=ah

strongSwan's IKEv2 charon daemon does not support the AH protocol [yet].

Your connection definitions are very confusing.
In ipsec.conf you define

>conn jay1
>       left=10.1.1.42
>       right=10.1.1.10
>       rightsubnet=10.1.2.42/32

>conn jay2
>       left=10.1.1.10
>       right=10.1.1.42
>       rightsubnet=10.1.2.10/32

whereas in your ANVL appplication you define:

IKE_SA_INIT request:
IP: Source Address         = 10.1.1.20
IP: Destination Address    = 10.1.1.42

IKE_SA_INIT response:
IP: Source Address         = 10.1.1.42
IP: Destination Address    = 10.1.1.20

IKE_AUTH request:
IP: Source Address         = 10.1.1.20
IP: Destination Address    = 10.1.1.42

IKEV2: ----- IKEV2 Traffic Selector Data ----
IKEV2: TS Type                   =  7 ( IPV4 Addr Range)
IKEV2: IP Protocol ID            =  0
IKEV2: Selector Length           =  16
IKEV2: Start Port                = 0
IKEV2: End Port                  = 65535
IKEV2: IPV4 Start Address       = 10.1.1.20
IKEV2: IPV4 End Address         = 10.1.1.20

IKEV2: ----- IKEV2 Traffic Selector Data ----
IKEV2: TS Type                   =  7 ( IPV4 Addr Range)
IKEV2: IP Protocol ID            =  0
IKEV2: Selector Length           =  16
IKEV2: Start Port                = 0
IKEV2: End Port                  = 65535
IKEV2: IPV4 Start Address       = 10.1.1.0
IKEV2: IPV4 End Address         = 10.1.1.255

Translated to an ipsec.conf file for the strongSwan peer:

left=10.1.1.42
leftsubnet=10.1.1.0/24
right=101.1.20

Which does not match either jay1 or jay2. But nevertheless
The request seems successful:

IKE_AUTH response:
IP: Source Address         = 10.1.1.42
IP: Destination Address    = 10.1.1.20

IKEV2: ----- IKEV2 Traffic Selector Data ----
IKEV2: TS Type                   =  7 ( IPV4 Addr Range)
IKEV2: IP Protocol ID            =  0
IKEV2: Selector Length           =  16
IKEV2: Start Port                = 0
IKEV2: End Port                  = 65535
IKEV2: IPV4 Start Address       = 10.1.1.20
IKEV2: IPV4 End Address         = 10.1.1.20

IKEV2: ----- IKEV2 Traffic Selector Data ----
IKEV2: TS Type                   =  7 ( IPV4 Addr Range)
IKEV2: IP Protocol ID            =  0
IKEV2: Selector Length           =  16
IKEV2: Start Port                = 0
IKEV2: End Port                  = 65535
IKEV2: IPV4 Start Address       = 10.1.1.42
IKEV2: IPV4 End Address         = 10.1.1.42

This translates to

left=10.1.1.42
right=10.1.1.20

so that traffic selector narrowing takes place.

CREATE_CHILD_SA request:
IP: Source Address         = 10.1.1.20
IP: Destination Address    = 10.1.1.42

In this CREATE_CHILD_SA message you don't request any
additional traffic selectors. Therefore don't be surprised
to receive a NO_PROPOSAL_CHOSEN as a response!

If you want us to help you, please provide consistent debugging
information and as Daniel Mentz correctly mentioned, add a
log from the strongSwan side!!!

Regards

Andreas

Tilak Adhya wrote:
> Hi Andreas,
> 
> !.5.txt is the log file we are sending to the Strongswan. Stongswan
> has the ip 10.1.1.42.
> And the corresponding configuration file is also attached with this
> mail.
> Waiting for valuable comments.
> 
> Thanks in advance...
> Tilak
> 
> 
> On Mon, 18 May 2009 11:50:29 +0530 wrote
>>H Tilak,
>>
>>without any log and configuration information we cannot possibly
>>help you.
>>
>>Regards
>>
>>Andreas
>>
>>Tilak Adhya wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I am new to this list and using Strongswan for the last 2 months...
> I
>>> am facing a problem regarding the CREATE_CHILD_SA for IKEV2 with
>>> Strongswan. I have connected two Strongswan back to back but not
> able
>>> to send CREATE_CHILD_SAs. Also, I sent CREATE_CHILD_SA but
> Strongswan
>>> is not responding properly. It replies with "No Proposal CHosen";
> but
>>> proposals configured in the Strongswan should match. Not getting
> the
>>> reason. If you need the log files I can post it.
>>> Your help is highly appreciated.
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> Tilak
>>>
>>> *--
>>> tilak

======================================================================
Andreas Steffen                         andreas.stef...@strongswan.org
strongSwan - the Linux VPN Solution!                www.strongswan.org
Institute for Internet Technologies and Applications
University of Applied Sciences Rapperswil
CH-8640 Rapperswil (Switzerland)
===========================================================[ITA-HSR]==

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
Users@lists.strongswan.org
https://lists.strongswan.org/mailman/listinfo/users

Reply via email to