[sf-lug] VPN Questions

[Tom Haddon]

On Tue, 2007-12-04 at 10:38 -0800, Mark K. Zanfardino wrote:
> Tom,
> 
> Yes, that is what I thought: that a new virtual device would be created
> (say eth2) that would be bound with the ip address and gateway
> information that is provided by QuickVPN.  This is the step I'm not
> seeing.  And being that I'm establishing the VPN connection via QuickVPN
> and it's a windows application I shouldn't expect that it would create
> said device.
> 
> My assumption is that QuickVPN has in fact established the connection
> (as is evidenced by QuickVPN and the log files on the VPN router) but
> that it has no way to hand off that information to linux.  Again, just a
> wild stab in the dark.
> 
> At any rate, it seems my best bet will be to use a windows PC to
> establish the VPN connection, then use ssh to connect to the windows box
> with my linux lappy.  Then I should be able to run tightvnc to connect
> to my workstation desktop...
> 
> Let me know if you come up with anything more direct.

Seems like QuickVPN only establishes the connection within Wine, and
that's why you don't see the connection info within Linux. After
establishing the connection, can you try launching a browser within
wine? If this works, it looks like you need to find a way to bridge the
connection from Wine to the parent OS. I'm afraid I don't have any more
details than that at the moment.

Cheers, Tom

> 
> Cheers!
> 
> Tom Haddon wrote:
> > On Tue, 2007-12-04 at 10:20 -0800, Mark K. Zanfardino wrote:
> >   
> >> Tom
> >>
> >> I've not used route before.  Th results of route -n however only seems
> >> to return addresses specific to the router I'm presently connected to,
> >> ever after I've established the QuickVPN connection.  That is, I'm
> >> connected to a router here at work that is outside out intranet and
> >> route -n shows just the ip's related to that router.
> >>
> >> I've installed traceroute and used it to trace my route to an internal
> >> address, but I fear that's not very productive.  We use 10.10.10.x for
> >> our internal addresses (as opposed to say 192.168.x.x).  As a result,
> >> when I traceroute to 10.10.10.1 I'm likely getting hitting a class A
> >> router owned by AT&T or someone.
> >>     
> >
> > Well that sounds to me like your problem. Typically a VPN connection
> > will create a new "virtual" networking device and that will have an IP
> > address on the network you're connecting to, and will be added to your
> > route table as the device to connect to that network on. It sounds to me
> > like this step isn't happening - I'm not sure if that's because the VPN
> > device works differently in your case, or it's the actually problem. 
> >
> > I'm actually with the author of this article so I can ask him a little
> > about how it works and see if he has any suggestions for you.
> >
> > Cheers, Tom
> >
> >
> >
> >