I am planning on replacing our ISA servers with Mikrotik and as it is now, all of our branches are connected with LT2P/IPsec site-to-site. I have searched for a couple of hours and used just as many hours testing within vmware to see if I could figure it out myself, unfortunately with no success. Is it possible for someone to give a detailed explanation how a L2TP/IPsec site-to-site VPN is established between 2 Mikrotik routers?As far as my research has told me, LT2P/IPsec should be more stable as apposed to running a pure IPsec site-to-site as explained here:. Would you agree? That said, it can't be 'more stable'.
After a short while, “R” should appear to the left of your L2TP IPsec connection’s name – this means your Mikrotik is connected successfully to a Torguard VPN server. From the main menu on the left-hand side, click “IP” then “Firewall”. L2TP/IPsec connection without sharing internet. Hi All I configured our RB931 to connect to a remote L2TP server, which works fine, but I would prefer if all internet traffic did not go across the tunnel as well. I remember on Windows there was an option to unselect (something about remote gateway). How would I do this on our Mikrotik?
IPsec is still used for transporting L2TP, so L2TP inside of IPsec is going to be exactly as stable as anything else wrapped in IPsec, or a straight IPsec-to-IPsec connection.The most common reason for using another tunnel protocol inside of IPsec is that IPsec only works for unicast packets, and cannot transport multicast or broadcasts. For many applications (such as routing protocols) you need broadcasts and multicasts. Looking at the other side of the coin, there is often a requirement to strongly protect a tunneling protocol such as GRE (EoIP for all intents and purposes) or L2TP when that protocol has no or weak native encryption, so that tunneling protocol is in turn wrapped in IPsec, which has excellent encryption. Thanks for your reply, it is much appreciated. Especially because you took the time to explain and sort out my confusion, that makes me happy!I attempted to follow that guide and establish the l2tp ipsec between my 2 virtual routerOS machines. I verified the l2tp has the 'connected' status.
I verified that there are 'Installed SA' entries. I verified the computers in each LAN can ping the WAN of the opposing routers (with NAT masquerading). But I can not ping clients inside the LAN from the opposing router through the ipsec tunnel.Router 1:192.168.10.5/24 WAN192.168.11.1/24 LANRouter 2:192.168.10.6/24 WAN192.168.12.1/24 LANMy best guess is that either1: The NAT masquerading is conflicting2: Because the 2 routers WAN are on the same subnet, that might be giving issuesBut besides that, I have no idea. Do you have any ideas on what could be wrong, or where I should start looking? It's a new day & new opportunity for me to work with this ^^ Since I'm still toying around with configurations I will wait posting all of the details of those outputs until I am 100% stuck, but thanks for the heads-up.I would love trying to ditch the IPsec, but how exactly do I do this? When I look through the guide that I followed, the IPsec steps consist of creating a proposal, policy, and peer.
I am a bit confused exactly what config in that guide tells the router to route through the IPsec opposed to L2TP. Perhaps I just disable the IPsec proposal, policy, and peer through winbox and the rest will happen automatically? Or do I have to do something else to make the router use L2TP as opposed to IPsec through L2TP?Also, a whole different question. Is it possible to create a site-to-site L2TP/IPsec between a Mikrotik router and a ISA 2006 server?
If not, perhaps IPsec tunnel mode or PPTP is possible? Has anyone had experience with this? Yes, just remove the IPsec policy and peer. L2TP and IPsec are entirely unrelated. L2TP is a tunneling protocol all by itself. It has no idea about IPsec, and creates a tunnel between the two sites, encapsulating all the packets between the two sites in its own packets. Then IPsec (a different tunneling protocol, which has strong encryption) is used to wrap all the L2TP packets inside of IPsec.
Drv8825 driver for mac. It's like a Russian doll, with each doll being unaware that another, bigger doll may be around itself - it just knows that it has something inside of it, but not that it might be inside of something.L2TP and IPsec are open standards, and implementations on different platforms should be compatible. Here is an article of how to do this between RouterOS and Windows XP.
- Author: admin
- Category: Category
I am planning on replacing our ISA servers with Mikrotik and as it is now, all of our branches are connected with LT2P/IPsec site-to-site. I have searched for a couple of hours and used just as many hours testing within vmware to see if I could figure it out myself, unfortunately with no success. Is it possible for someone to give a detailed explanation how a L2TP/IPsec site-to-site VPN is established between 2 Mikrotik routers?As far as my research has told me, LT2P/IPsec should be more stable as apposed to running a pure IPsec site-to-site as explained here:. Would you agree? That said, it can't be 'more stable'.
After a short while, “R” should appear to the left of your L2TP IPsec connection’s name – this means your Mikrotik is connected successfully to a Torguard VPN server. From the main menu on the left-hand side, click “IP” then “Firewall”. L2TP/IPsec connection without sharing internet. Hi All I configured our RB931 to connect to a remote L2TP server, which works fine, but I would prefer if all internet traffic did not go across the tunnel as well. I remember on Windows there was an option to unselect (something about remote gateway). How would I do this on our Mikrotik?
IPsec is still used for transporting L2TP, so L2TP inside of IPsec is going to be exactly as stable as anything else wrapped in IPsec, or a straight IPsec-to-IPsec connection.The most common reason for using another tunnel protocol inside of IPsec is that IPsec only works for unicast packets, and cannot transport multicast or broadcasts. For many applications (such as routing protocols) you need broadcasts and multicasts. Looking at the other side of the coin, there is often a requirement to strongly protect a tunneling protocol such as GRE (EoIP for all intents and purposes) or L2TP when that protocol has no or weak native encryption, so that tunneling protocol is in turn wrapped in IPsec, which has excellent encryption. Thanks for your reply, it is much appreciated. Especially because you took the time to explain and sort out my confusion, that makes me happy!I attempted to follow that guide and establish the l2tp ipsec between my 2 virtual routerOS machines. I verified the l2tp has the 'connected' status.
I verified that there are 'Installed SA' entries. I verified the computers in each LAN can ping the WAN of the opposing routers (with NAT masquerading). But I can not ping clients inside the LAN from the opposing router through the ipsec tunnel.Router 1:192.168.10.5/24 WAN192.168.11.1/24 LANRouter 2:192.168.10.6/24 WAN192.168.12.1/24 LANMy best guess is that either1: The NAT masquerading is conflicting2: Because the 2 routers WAN are on the same subnet, that might be giving issuesBut besides that, I have no idea. Do you have any ideas on what could be wrong, or where I should start looking? It's a new day & new opportunity for me to work with this ^^ Since I'm still toying around with configurations I will wait posting all of the details of those outputs until I am 100% stuck, but thanks for the heads-up.I would love trying to ditch the IPsec, but how exactly do I do this? When I look through the guide that I followed, the IPsec steps consist of creating a proposal, policy, and peer.
I am a bit confused exactly what config in that guide tells the router to route through the IPsec opposed to L2TP. Perhaps I just disable the IPsec proposal, policy, and peer through winbox and the rest will happen automatically? Or do I have to do something else to make the router use L2TP as opposed to IPsec through L2TP?Also, a whole different question. Is it possible to create a site-to-site L2TP/IPsec between a Mikrotik router and a ISA 2006 server?
If not, perhaps IPsec tunnel mode or PPTP is possible? Has anyone had experience with this? Yes, just remove the IPsec policy and peer. L2TP and IPsec are entirely unrelated. L2TP is a tunneling protocol all by itself. It has no idea about IPsec, and creates a tunnel between the two sites, encapsulating all the packets between the two sites in its own packets. Then IPsec (a different tunneling protocol, which has strong encryption) is used to wrap all the L2TP packets inside of IPsec.
Drv8825 driver for mac. It's like a Russian doll, with each doll being unaware that another, bigger doll may be around itself - it just knows that it has something inside of it, but not that it might be inside of something.L2TP and IPsec are open standards, and implementations on different platforms should be compatible. Here is an article of how to do this between RouterOS and Windows XP.