[Swan] Aggressive mode not possible with Juniper Netscreen

Elison Niven elison.niven at cyberoam.com
Tue Jan 22 16:58:41 EET 2013


Hi,

No change after setting nhelpers=0.
What logs are you expecting for in plutodebug=all?

On Tuesday 22 January 2013 08:10 PM, Paul Wouters wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Jan 2013, Elison Niven wrote:
>
>> Also Phase 1 on Libreswan is not complete as ipsec auto --status does
>> not say that ISAKMP SA established.
>
> Yes, you need an acceptable AI2 before your phase 1 is up.
>
>> #ipsec auto --status | tail
>> 000 #527: "jun":500 STATE_AGGR_R1 (sent AR1, expecting AI2);
>> EVENT_RETRANSMIT in 22s; nodpd; idle; import:respond to stranger
>
> If the packet AI2 is rejected, it likely means:
>
> - The remote is retransmitting the previous AI1 packet which is not
>    encrypted, possible due to a misconfiguration.
> - The remote is sending an error in AI2, meaning it failed to agree
>    on the crypto, therefor it cannot be encrypted.
> - The remote is having a non-RFC compliant implementation (unlikely)
>
> In the latter case, you can run with plutodebug=all, and you should see
> the entire parsing of the payloads, and it will likely contain some kind
> of notify message.
>
> As per RFC, aggressive mode packet AR2/IR2 should be encrypted.
>
> The only possibly reason I can come up with, if we assume *swan is the
> problem (which I am currently thinking is not likely) is a problem with
> the aggressive mode crypto helpers, so you can try adding nhelpers=0
> to "config setup" and restart ipsec.
>
> Paul
>
>> On Tuesday 22 January 2013 09:28:53 AM IST, Elison Niven wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>> But then libreswan says:
>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: "jun" #1: Quick Mode message
>>> is unacceptable because it is for an incomplete ISAKMP SA"
>>>
>>> On Monday 21 January 2013 06:45:50 PM IST, Philippe Vouters wrote:
>>>> I am NOT misleading you at all. Read your traces. Libreswan says this:
>>>>
>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | phase 1 is done, looking
>>>> for phase 2 to unpend
>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | complete state transition
>>>> with STF_INLINE
>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | complete state transition
>>>> with STF_INLINE
>>>>
>>>> So Libreswan is already in phase 2 before it says:
>>>>
>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: "jun" #1: packet rejected:
>>>> should have been encrypted
>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: "jun" #1: sending
>>>> notification INVALID_FLAGS to 10.103.2.75:500
>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | sending 40 bytes for
>>>> notification packet through p18p1:500 to 10.103.2.75:500 (using #1)
>>>>
>>>> And you should retrieve this INVALID_FLAGS notification from
>>>> Libnreswan in your Netscreen traces. Set Netscreen to a more
>>>> appropriate log level and you'll find this notification.
>>>>
>>>> Philippe Vouters (Fontainebleau/France)
>>>> URL: http://vouters.dyndns.org/
>>>> SIP: sip:Vouters at sip.linphone.org
>>>>
>>>> Le 21/01/2013 12:01, Elison Niven a écrit :
>>>>> No, you are mistaken.
>>>>> According to Netscreen, Phase 1 is completed.
>>>>> According to Libreswan, Phase 1 is incomplete.
>>>>> These logs are of the Netscreen :
>>>>> 2013-01-18 21:19:38    info    IKE<10.103.6.114> Phase 2: Initiated
>>>>> negotiations.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Monday 21 January 2013 04:26:59 PM IST, Philippe Vouters wrote:
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Run Wireshark on the Libreswan side and locate the network packet
>>>>>> coming from Netscreen which is not using the ESP protocol when it
>>>>>> should. According to your Libreswan traces, you are in phase 2.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Philippe Vouters (Fontainebleau/France)
>>>>>> URL: http://vouters.dyndns.org/
>>>>>> SIP: sip:Vouters at sip.linphone.org
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Le 21/01/2013 05:25, Elison Niven a écrit :
>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Sunday 20 January 2013 04:54:43 AM IST, Paul Wouters wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Fri, 18 Jan 2013, Philippe Vouters wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> In summary, it looks to me there are two issues here :
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 1/ Libreswan could be wrongly issuing the packet rejected message
>>>>>>>>> meanwhile taking the corresponding action.
>>>>>>>>> 2/ Another problem you seem to face is on your Netscreen side
>>>>>>>>> (your
>>>>>>>>> traces). At the time of the Libreswan packet rejected message,
>>>>>>>>> Netscreen would wrongly assume it is already phase 2 while
>>>>>>>>> Libreswan
>>>>>>>>> is still keeping in phase 1.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'm pretty sure this is 2)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> There is a mismatch in configuration.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I do not see how this is a mismatch in the configuration as when
>>>>>>> Libreswan initiates the connection, it is working fine!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Here are the logs on libreswan with plutodebug=control :
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: |
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | *received 324 bytes from
>>>>>>> 10.103.2.75:500 on p18p1 (port=500)
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: |  processing version=1.0
>>>>>>> packet with exchange type=ISAKMP_XCHG_AGGR (4)
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: packet from
>>>>>>> 10.103.2.75:500:
>>>>>>> ignoring unknown Vendor ID payload
>>>>>>> [4a4340b543e02b84c88a8b96a8af9ebe77d9accc0000000b00000500]
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: packet from
>>>>>>> 10.103.2.75:500:
>>>>>>> received Vendor ID payload [draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-00]
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: packet from
>>>>>>> 10.103.2.75:500:
>>>>>>> ignoring Vendor ID payload [HeartBeat Notify 386b0100]
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | creating state object #1
>>>>>>> at 0x988ffc8
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: "jun" #1: Aggressive mode
>>>>>>> peer ID is ID_IPV4_ADDR: '10.103.2.75'
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | started looking for
>>>>>>> secret
>>>>>>> for 10.103.6.114->10.103.2.75 of kind PPK_PSK
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | actually looking for
>>>>>>> secret for 10.103.6.114->10.103.2.75 of kind PPK_PSK
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | 1: compared key
>>>>>>> 10.103.2.75 to 10.103.6.114 / 10.103.2.75 -> 4
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | 2: compared key
>>>>>>> 10.103.6.114 to 10.103.6.114 / 10.103.2.75 -> 12
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | line 4: match=12
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | best_match 0>12
>>>>>>> best=0x988cbb0 (line=4)
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | 1: compared key %any to
>>>>>>> 10.103.6.114 / 10.103.2.75 -> 2
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | 2: compared key
>>>>>>> 10.103.6.114 to 10.103.6.114 / 10.103.2.75 -> 10
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | line 3: match=10
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | match(10) was not
>>>>>>> best_match(12)
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | 1: compared key
>>>>>>> 10.103.7.41 to 10.103.6.114 / 10.103.2.75 -> 0
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | 2: compared key
>>>>>>> 10.103.6.114 to 10.103.6.114 / 10.103.2.75 -> 8
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | line 2: match=8
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | 1: compared key
>>>>>>> 10.103.7.155 to 10.103.6.114 / 10.103.2.75 -> 0
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | 2: compared key
>>>>>>> 10.103.6.114 to 10.103.6.114 / 10.103.2.75 -> 8
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | line 1: match=8
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | concluding with
>>>>>>> best_match=12 best=0x988cbb0 (lineno=4)
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | offered CA: '%none'
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | processing connection jun
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | ICOOKIE:  6c 23 d9 65 fa
>>>>>>> 87 ba 23
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | RCOOKIE:  94 46 8a 37 2d
>>>>>>> 46 ff 8d
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | state hash entry 23
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | inserting state object #1
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | inserting event
>>>>>>> EVENT_SO_DISCARD, timeout in 0 seconds for #1
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: "jun" #1: responding to
>>>>>>> Aggressive Mode, state #1, connection "jun" from 10.103.2.75
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: "jun" #1: enabling possible
>>>>>>> NAT-traversal with method draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-00/01
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | started looking for
>>>>>>> secret
>>>>>>> for 10.103.6.114->10.103.2.75 of kind PPK_PSK
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | actually looking for
>>>>>>> secret for 10.103.6.114->10.103.2.75 of kind PPK_PSK
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | 1: compared key
>>>>>>> 10.103.2.75 to 10.103.6.114 / 10.103.2.75 -> 4
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | 2: compared key
>>>>>>> 10.103.6.114 to 10.103.6.114 / 10.103.2.75 -> 12
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | line 4: match=12
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | best_match 0>12
>>>>>>> best=0x988cbb0 (line=4)
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | 1: compared key %any to
>>>>>>> 10.103.6.114 / 10.103.2.75 -> 2
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | 2: compared key
>>>>>>> 10.103.6.114 to 10.103.6.114 / 10.103.2.75 -> 10
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | line 3: match=10
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | match(10) was not
>>>>>>> best_match(12)
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | 1: compared key
>>>>>>> 10.103.7.41 to 10.103.6.114 / 10.103.2.75 -> 0
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | 2: compared key
>>>>>>> 10.103.6.114 to 10.103.6.114 / 10.103.2.75 -> 8
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | line 2: match=8
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | 1: compared key
>>>>>>> 10.103.7.155 to 10.103.6.114 / 10.103.2.75 -> 0
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | 2: compared key
>>>>>>> 10.103.6.114 to 10.103.6.114 / 10.103.2.75 -> 8
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | line 1: match=8
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | concluding with
>>>>>>> best_match=12 best=0x988cbb0 (lineno=4)
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | helper -1 doing
>>>>>>> build_kenonce op id: 0
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | processing connection jun
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | started looking for
>>>>>>> secret
>>>>>>> for 10.103.6.114->10.103.2.75 of kind PPK_PSK
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | actually looking for
>>>>>>> secret for 10.103.6.114->10.103.2.75 of kind PPK_PSK
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | 1: compared key
>>>>>>> 10.103.2.75 to 10.103.6.114 / 10.103.2.75 -> 4
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | 2: compared key
>>>>>>> 10.103.6.114 to 10.103.6.114 / 10.103.2.75 -> 12
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | line 4: match=12
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | best_match 0>12
>>>>>>> best=0x988cbb0 (line=4)
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | 1: compared key %any to
>>>>>>> 10.103.6.114 / 10.103.2.75 -> 2
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | 2: compared key
>>>>>>> 10.103.6.114 to 10.103.6.114 / 10.103.2.75 -> 10
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | line 3: match=10
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | match(10) was not
>>>>>>> best_match(12)
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | 1: compared key
>>>>>>> 10.103.7.41 to 10.103.6.114 / 10.103.2.75 -> 0
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | 2: compared key
>>>>>>> 10.103.6.114 to 10.103.6.114 / 10.103.2.75 -> 8
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | line 2: match=8
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | 1: compared key
>>>>>>> 10.103.7.155 to 10.103.6.114 / 10.103.2.75 -> 0
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | 2: compared key
>>>>>>> 10.103.6.114 to 10.103.6.114 / 10.103.2.75 -> 8
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | line 1: match=8
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | concluding with
>>>>>>> best_match=12 best=0x988cbb0 (lineno=4)
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | parent1 type: 7 group: 2
>>>>>>> len: 2680
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | helper -1 doing compute
>>>>>>> dh+iv op id: 0
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | processing connection jun
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | thinking about whether to
>>>>>>> send my certificate:
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: |   I have RSA key:
>>>>>>> OAKLEY_PRESHARED_KEY cert.type: CERT_NONE
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: |   sendcert:
>>>>>>> CERT_ALWAYSSEND and I did not get a certificate request
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: |   so do not send cert.
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | I did not send a
>>>>>>> certificate because digital signatures are not being used. (PSK)
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: |  I am not sending a
>>>>>>> certificate request
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | started looking for
>>>>>>> secret
>>>>>>> for 10.103.6.114->10.103.2.75 of kind PPK_PSK
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | actually looking for
>>>>>>> secret for 10.103.6.114->10.103.2.75 of kind PPK_PSK
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | 1: compared key
>>>>>>> 10.103.2.75 to 10.103.6.114 / 10.103.2.75 -> 4
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | 2: compared key
>>>>>>> 10.103.6.114 to 10.103.6.114 / 10.103.2.75 -> 12
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | line 4: match=12
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | best_match 0>12
>>>>>>> best=0x988cbb0 (line=4)
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | 1: compared key %any to
>>>>>>> 10.103.6.114 / 10.103.2.75 -> 2
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | 2: compared key
>>>>>>> 10.103.6.114 to 10.103.6.114 / 10.103.2.75 -> 10
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | line 3: match=10
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | match(10) was not
>>>>>>> best_match(12)
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | 1: compared key
>>>>>>> 10.103.7.41 to 10.103.6.114 / 10.103.2.75 -> 0
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | 2: compared key
>>>>>>> 10.103.6.114 to 10.103.6.114 / 10.103.2.75 -> 8
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | line 2: match=8
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | 1: compared key
>>>>>>> 10.103.7.155 to 10.103.6.114 / 10.103.2.75 -> 0
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | 2: compared key
>>>>>>> 10.103.6.114 to 10.103.6.114 / 10.103.2.75 -> 8
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | line 1: match=8
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | concluding with
>>>>>>> best_match=12 best=0x988cbb0 (lineno=4)
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | complete state transition
>>>>>>> with STF_OK
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: "jun" #1: transition from
>>>>>>> state STATE_AGGR_R0 to state STATE_AGGR_R1
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | sending reply packet to
>>>>>>> 10.103.2.75:500 (from port 500)
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | sending 356 bytes for
>>>>>>> STATE_AGGR_R0 through p18p1:500 to 10.103.2.75:500 (using #1)
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | inserting event
>>>>>>> EVENT_RETRANSMIT, timeout in 10 seconds for #1
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: "jun" #1: STATE_AGGR_R1:
>>>>>>> sent AR1, expecting AI2
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | modecfg pull: noquirk
>>>>>>> policy:push not-client
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | phase 1 is done, looking
>>>>>>> for phase 2 to unpend
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | complete state transition
>>>>>>> with STF_INLINE
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | complete state transition
>>>>>>> with STF_INLINE
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | * processed 0 messages
>>>>>>> from cryptographic helpers
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | next event
>>>>>>> EVENT_RETRANSMIT in 10 seconds for #1
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | next event
>>>>>>> EVENT_RETRANSMIT in 10 seconds for #1
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: |
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | *received 100 bytes from
>>>>>>> 10.103.2.75:500 on p18p1 (port=500)
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: |  processing version=1.0
>>>>>>> packet with exchange type=ISAKMP_XCHG_AGGR (4)
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | ICOOKIE:  6c 23 d9 65 fa
>>>>>>> 87 ba 23
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | RCOOKIE:  94 46 8a 37 2d
>>>>>>> 46 ff 8d
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | state hash entry 23
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | v1 peer and cookies match
>>>>>>> on #1, provided msgid 00000000 vs 00000000
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | v1 state object #1 found,
>>>>>>> in STATE_AGGR_R1
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | processing connection jun
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: "jun" #1: packet rejected:
>>>>>>> should have been encrypted
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: "jun" #1: sending
>>>>>>> notification INVALID_FLAGS to 10.103.2.75:500
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | sending 40 bytes for
>>>>>>> notification packet through p18p1:500 to 10.103.2.75:500 (using #1)
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | * processed 0 messages
>>>>>>> from cryptographic helpers
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | next event
>>>>>>> EVENT_RETRANSMIT in 10 seconds for #1
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | next event
>>>>>>> EVENT_RETRANSMIT in 10 seconds for #1
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: |
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | *received 348 bytes from
>>>>>>> 10.103.2.75:500 on p18p1 (port=500)
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: |  processing version=1.0
>>>>>>> packet with exchange type=ISAKMP_XCHG_QUICK (32)
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | ICOOKIE:  6c 23 d9 65 fa
>>>>>>> 87 ba 23
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | RCOOKIE:  94 46 8a 37 2d
>>>>>>> 46 ff 8d
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | state hash entry 23
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | v1 peer and cookies match
>>>>>>> on #1, provided msgid e4c27ed0 vs 00000000
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | v1 state object not found
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | ICOOKIE:  6c 23 d9 65 fa
>>>>>>> 87 ba 23
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | RCOOKIE:  94 46 8a 37 2d
>>>>>>> 46 ff 8d
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | state hash entry 23
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | v1 peer and cookies match
>>>>>>> on #1, provided msgid 00000000 vs 00000000
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | v1 state object #1 found,
>>>>>>> in STATE_AGGR_R1
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | processing connection jun
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: "jun" #1: Quick Mode
>>>>>>> message
>>>>>>> is unacceptable because it is for an incomplete ISAKMP SA
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | payload malformed
>>>>>>> after IV
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: |   8d 48 d8 bb  c7 43
>>>>>>> 10 96
>>>>>>> a1 f5 f1 52  9d c1 d5 c0
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: |   15 8f be 33
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: "jun" #1: sending
>>>>>>> notification PAYLOAD_MALFORMED to 10.103.2.75:500
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | sending 40 bytes for
>>>>>>> notification packet through p18p1:500 to 10.103.2.75:500 (using #1)
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | * processed 0 messages
>>>>>>> from cryptographic helpers
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | next event
>>>>>>> EVENT_RETRANSMIT in 10 seconds for #1
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:47 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | next event
>>>>>>> EVENT_RETRANSMIT in 10 seconds for #1
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:51 elisonniven pluto[4299]: |
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:51 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | *received 348 bytes from
>>>>>>> 10.103.2.75:500 on p18p1 (port=500)
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:51 elisonniven pluto[4299]: |  processing version=1.0
>>>>>>> packet with exchange type=ISAKMP_XCHG_QUICK (32)
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:51 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | ICOOKIE:  6c 23 d9 65 fa
>>>>>>> 87 ba 23
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:51 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | RCOOKIE:  94 46 8a 37 2d
>>>>>>> 46 ff 8d
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:51 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | state hash entry 23
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:51 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | v1 peer and cookies match
>>>>>>> on #1, provided msgid e4c27ed0 vs 00000000
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:51 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | v1 state object not found
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:51 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | ICOOKIE:  6c 23 d9 65 fa
>>>>>>> 87 ba 23
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:51 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | RCOOKIE:  94 46 8a 37 2d
>>>>>>> 46 ff 8d
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:51 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | state hash entry 23
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:51 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | v1 peer and cookies match
>>>>>>> on #1, provided msgid 00000000 vs 00000000
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:51 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | v1 state object #1 found,
>>>>>>> in STATE_AGGR_R1
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:51 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | processing connection jun
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:51 elisonniven pluto[4299]: "jun" #1: Quick Mode
>>>>>>> message
>>>>>>> is unacceptable because it is for an incomplete ISAKMP SA
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:51 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | payload malformed
>>>>>>> after IV
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:51 elisonniven pluto[4299]: |   8d 48 d8 bb  c7 43
>>>>>>> 10 96
>>>>>>> a1 f5 f1 52  9d c1 d5 c0
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:51 elisonniven pluto[4299]: |   15 8f be 33
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:51 elisonniven pluto[4299]: "jun" #1: sending
>>>>>>> notification PAYLOAD_MALFORMED to 10.103.2.75:500
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:51 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | sending 40 bytes for
>>>>>>> notification packet through p18p1:500 to 10.103.2.75:500 (using #1)
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:51 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | * processed 0 messages
>>>>>>> from cryptographic helpers
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:51 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | next event
>>>>>>> EVENT_RETRANSMIT in 6 seconds for #1
>>>>>>> Jan 21 09:53:51 elisonniven pluto[4299]: | next event
>>>>>>> EVENT_RETRANSMIT in 6 seconds for #1
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>> Elison Niven
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>> Elison Niven
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Best Regards,
>>> Elison Niven
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Swan mailing list
>>> Swan at lists.libreswan.org
>>> https://lists.libreswan.org/mailman/listinfo/swan
>>
>> --
>> Best Regards,
>> Elison Niven
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Swan mailing list
>> Swan at lists.libreswan.org
>> https://lists.libreswan.org/mailman/listinfo/swan
>>
>
>

-- 
Best Regards,
Elison Niven


More information about the Swan mailing list