Networking Forums

Networking Forums > Computer Networking > Linux Networking > can internet gateway be on opposite side of a tunnel?

Reply
Thread Tools Display Modes

can internet gateway be on opposite side of a tunnel?

 
 
dmorgan1
Guest
Posts: n/a

 
      06-16-2005, 02:21 AM

Can a machine use a host on the opposite side of an ipip tunnel as its
gateway to the internet?

I have 2 LANs, a gateway in each, and an ipip tunnel between the
gateways. A host in either LAN designates its local tunnel endpoint as
its default gateway. Now any host in LAN A can interact transparently
with any in LAN B and vice versa.

I can't quite figure it out, but I want the hosts in LAN A to be able
to use the gateway in LAN B as their main gateway to the internet
(because gateway B's internet access isn't restricted). Those hosts
can reach LAN B just fine through the tunnel. And LAN B can reach the
internet. But I can't simply have a LAN A host designate the LAN B
gateway for its default gw. The LAN A host already uses and depends
on using the LAN A gateway for its default. Traffic from LAN A, when
it hits the LAN A gateway, gets stuffed into the tunnel only if it's
addressed to LAN B's subnet. If it's going somewhere else, it never
gets into the tunnel, but goes out through LAN A gateway's internet
interface where it soon hits a firewall. It all depends on what the IP
destination addresses are.

Is there some tricky routing approach I could implement on LAN A
gateway that would push LAN A hosts' packets headed
"everywhere-outside-the-2-LANs" into the tunnel so LAN B gateway would
get to handle them? I control both gateways.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Tauno Voipio
Guest
Posts: n/a

 
      06-16-2005, 05:57 AM
dmorgan1 wrote:
> Can a machine use a host on the opposite side of an ipip tunnel as its
> gateway to the internet?
>
> I have 2 LANs, a gateway in each, and an ipip tunnel between the
> gateways. A host in either LAN designates its local tunnel endpoint as
> its default gateway. Now any host in LAN A can interact transparently
> with any in LAN B and vice versa.
>
> I can't quite figure it out, but I want the hosts in LAN A to be able
> to use the gateway in LAN B as their main gateway to the internet
> (because gateway B's internet access isn't restricted). Those hosts
> can reach LAN B just fine through the tunnel. And LAN B can reach the
> internet. But I can't simply have a LAN A host designate the LAN B
> gateway for its default gw. The LAN A host already uses and depends
> on using the LAN A gateway for its default. Traffic from LAN A, when
> it hits the LAN A gateway, gets stuffed into the tunnel only if it's
> addressed to LAN B's subnet. If it's going somewhere else, it never
> gets into the tunnel, but goes out through LAN A gateway's internet
> interface where it soon hits a firewall. It all depends on what the IP
> destination addresses are.
>
> Is there some tricky routing approach I could implement on LAN A
> gateway that would push LAN A hosts' packets headed
> "everywhere-outside-the-2-LANs" into the tunnel so LAN B gateway would
> get to handle them? I control both gateways.


Attempting to get around a company firewall?

If the firewall administrator can his job, the tunneled
packets will be restricted so that you'll have no
advantage in using the other end of the tunnel. An
IPIP tunneled packet is easy for the firewall to
analyze.

In principle, there is nothing else to prevent
this kind of kludge.

--

Tauno Voipio
tauno voipio (at) iki fi

 
Reply With Quote
 
dmorgan1
Guest
Posts: n/a

 
      06-16-2005, 03:39 PM
On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 05:57:29 GMT, Tauno Voipio
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>dmorgan1 wrote:
>> Can a machine use a host on the opposite side of an ipip tunnel as its
>> gateway to the internet?
>>
>> I have 2 LANs, a gateway in each, and an ipip tunnel between the
>> gateways. A host in either LAN designates its local tunnel endpoint as
>> its default gateway. Now any host in LAN A can interact transparently
>> with any in LAN B and vice versa.
>>
>> I can't quite figure it out, but I want the hosts in LAN A to be able
>> to use the gateway in LAN B as their main gateway to the internet
>> (because gateway B's internet access isn't restricted). Those hosts
>> can reach LAN B just fine through the tunnel. And LAN B can reach the
>> internet. But I can't simply have a LAN A host designate the LAN B
>> gateway for its default gw. The LAN A host already uses and depends
>> on using the LAN A gateway for its default. Traffic from LAN A, when
>> it hits the LAN A gateway, gets stuffed into the tunnel only if it's
>> addressed to LAN B's subnet. If it's going somewhere else, it never
>> gets into the tunnel, but goes out through LAN A gateway's internet
>> interface where it soon hits a firewall. It all depends on what the IP
>> destination addresses are.
>>
>> Is there some tricky routing approach I could implement on LAN A
>> gateway that would push LAN A hosts' packets headed
>> "everywhere-outside-the-2-LANs" into the tunnel so LAN B gateway would
>> get to handle them? I control both gateways.

>
>Attempting to get around a company firewall?
>
>If the firewall administrator can his job, the tunneled
>packets will be restricted so that you'll have no
>advantage in using the other end of the tunnel. An
>IPIP tunneled packet is easy for the firewall to
>analyze.
>
>In principle, there is nothing else to prevent
>this kind of kludge.


The firewall I'm attempting to get around belongs to a school where I
will teach a computer networking class next fall. The unfirewalled LAN
B is at my home.

The disadvantages of being firewalled in a networking class can tend
to defeat its purpose sometimes. I want to ask the school's network
admins to help, but am trying to do my homework first so that I ask
for what will work.

My objective is to enable the class to be unhobbled, while the school
network remains protected. My thought was to ask them to open a
tunnel, perhaps tied to my static IP at home and my machine's MAC
address at school. But I only want to ask them for something if I'm
confident in advance it will work.

As for your technical comments, it seems if the tunnel were an
encrypted one instead of cleartext ipip, their firewall wouldn't flag
the content. And, if in principle there's nothing else to prevent--
any recommendations on my original routing uncertainty would be
useful.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Tauno Voipio
Guest
Posts: n/a

 
      06-16-2005, 04:36 PM
dmorgan1 wrote:
>
> As for your technical comments, it seems if the tunnel were an
> encrypted one instead of cleartext ipip, their firewall wouldn't flag
> the content. And, if in principle there's nothing else to prevent--
> any recommendations on my original routing uncertainty would be
> useful.


A bare IPIP tunnel is about as private as going swimming without
the swimming trunks - use a real VPN instead. The current Internet
is a pretty wild place, not suitable for barebones tunnels.

My favourite is OpenVPN.

--

Tauno Voipio
tauno voipio (at) iki fi

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
simultaneous operation of transport and tunnel connections from same gateway siva.bhavani@gmail.com Linux Networking 0 05-16-2006 02:48 PM
Port 80 Times Out WAN side; works great LAN side; switched ISP =?Utf-8?B?anItbQ==?= Windows Networking 3 01-13-2005 04:21 PM
IPSec VPN tunnel with hardware gateway Danny L Windows Networking 1 11-13-2004 12:23 AM
NAT gateway and IPSec-tunnel on the same box - impossible? Johannes Mayr Windows Networking 2 09-24-2004 10:58 PM
2.6 IPSec tunnel mode gateway Abe Froman Linux Networking 2 02-21-2004 02:59 PM



1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11