|
|
On 10/4/05, Víctor Pérez Pereira <vperez@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > At the moment I have a client with ten I connect of VPN, which settle > down by means of connection of broadband ABA of Cantv 768, dinamicas > directions IP having in each one directions sucursal.no-ip.org; of equal > way they settle down tuneles by the recommended ports that go of 5000 in > ahead. Routes are added to see the local network and they are placed > verb 9 for registries of events; it is used like software, OpenVPN. Not clear to me, I think that English is not your native language, but I can't speak Spanish (assuming I guessed correctly). Not a complaint just an observation. > The problem: During considered times the connection with a branch is not > lost of unexpected way, this branch is entered via sucursal.no-ip.org to > verify if ocurrio a failure in the demon of OpenVPN and corroborating > that has not been problem of connection to Internet; one occurs with the > surprise that is active the demon of OpenVPN, has the servant connection > with the other connection but with which we are making him the > consultation for the network, this does not mean, the servant who > previously mentions that I let connect itself with this servant. > Briefly, the connections are independent, has 10 tuneles interfaces in > each servant to avoid problems like which comment. 10 tunnels 1 with a problem? > The verifications that I have made: > > 1. - The demon of the OpenVPN stays. > > 2. - The disconnections are not originated by change of DNS nor by > direction IP. > > 3. - The fire-resistant one is loaded and working (both servants). Firewall? > 4. - Consultations by means of "ping" to tuneles were made (10.0.0.x) > and do not give back respueta. Ping of the tunnel IP fail? > 5. - According to logs of OpenVPN any problem nor in the connections > Like either does not exist in the transference. > > 6. - Change the level of verb 9 to verb 5. > > However, a friend advises to me to modify the structure of the VPN to > IPSec, single that, llevaria time and I do not believe that it is the > most viable solution in this case; additionally, nonencounter > explanation some of which if the service of OpenVPN is assets in both > ends it does not throw error signals or it generates caida total of the > demon, both connections less stays assets with other branches with > "them" two. The "solution" sometimes is restart to the VPN but it is not > a real solution. > > Opinions on the matter? Greetings. What version of OpenVPN What operating systems? What are the configuration files (please strip the comments and any information you do not wish to be public). -- Leonard Isham, CISSP Ostendo non ostento. ____________________________________________ Openvpn-users mailing list Openvpn-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openvpn-users |