From: Sam Sgro (sam_at_freeswan.org)
Date: Fri Jan 10 2003 - 18:35:35 CET
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Fri, 10 Jan 2003, B.srinivasa Rao wrote:
> We hv deployed a site 2 site in one of our customers place and r able
> do a VPN tunelling in both the respective gateways.
>
> The customer at both ends do hv only a single Public IP each which has
> been configured on the gateways and has an IP of 203.168.101.X at one end
> & 202.168.100.X at the other end.The LAN ip's at both the ends r in the
> range 192.168.56.X.what configuration has to made on both the gateways for
> seamlessly accessing the private networks at both the ends?
An easier config would be to use distinct, non-routeable IP ranges. (You could
subdivide the 192.168.56.0/24 into two /25s, for example.) If using Windows
boxen, deploy a WINS server on one subnet and have all machines use it for
NetBIOS name resolution. (Ideally, use two, and have them update each
other.)
Standard Routing should handle the rest.
- --
Sam Sgro
sam_at_freeswan.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3ia
Charset: noconv
Comment: For the matching public key, finger the Reply-To: address.
iQCVAwUBPh8EaUOSC4btEQUtAQG2UQQAod/9vqSVPv0ECcVeNrEGwqAwWClJ5JbB
ZxzG1kiQ6KbeHR3FlHuLZ0Asz6CPRyiUUHxIImyE+hgrGrWLVInmv91IyBPBFVWX
T9lEZXd43DmMut7BMa0KMBhOQgXpdbPPAY+p+LYuUaLcFq5++FdEPjYPLnbqbOkl
lf77rg/qLVA=
=YDZP
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
Users_at_lists.freeswan.org
http://lists.freeswan.org/mailman/listinfo/users
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Jan 11 2003 - 05:21:14 CET