This discussion has been locked.
You can no longer post new replies to this discussion. If you have a question you can start a new discussion

SSL VPN : Site-to-Site SSL and Remote Access SSL VPN : Ubiquiti EdgeOS as Client

Hello

I have some "quasi newbie" question about UTM 9 site-to-site and remote access SSL VPN. We have used on UTM 9 since some years remote acces SSL with OpenVPN-clients and for Site-to-Site connections IPSec. Now we would like to change for Site-to-Site connections from IPSec to OpenVPN (SSL):

  1.  Is it correct that on the UTM  9.7 as VPN-server, Remote Access SSL VPN and Site-to-Site SSL VPN have to use separated ports (default port 1194 for Remote Access SSL VPN, default port 443 for Site-to-Site SSL VPN)?
  2. Is it "wise" to use default port 443 (standard port for https) for Site-to-Site SSL VPN or are other port-numbers better choices?
  3. I am sorry this is a realy newbie question: for our IPSec Site-to-Site connection we did not need a dedicated tunnel-IP-address space. Configuration examples for Site-to-Site SSL connections use instead a dedicated tunnel-IP-address space. Our actual local LAN network on UTM use 10.6X.0.0/16 and on the remote site (non UTM) the LAN private subnet is 10.6Y.0.0/16. Do we need however to setup a dedicated SSL tunnel-IP-address space to route between the different subnets (siteA <> SSL-Tunnnel <> siteB)?
  4. On our setting UTM 9 is the Site-To-Site SSL-server. Therefore we exported from UTM 9 the appropriate file.apc. It seems that this file does not contain all settings that are part of an standard .opvn OpenVPN client configuration file (also exported from UTM in the Remote Access section). Can we compose of the file.apc and the file.opvn by using the missing default settings from the file.opvn a correct configuration for any Site-to-Site SSL client?
  5. As Site-to-Site SSL client (UTM 9 as server) we are using some Ubiquiti EdgeOS routers (EdgeOS v2.0.9, OpenVPN 2.4.7 ). We would appreciate any hint for a correct Site-to-Site SSL client configuration?

Many thanks in advance and best regards



This thread was automatically locked due to age.
Parents
  • Hallo André,

    1. I usually use UDP 443 for SSL VPN, both S2S and Remote Access.  UDP makes the tunnels faster than using TCP.  Because of Google using UDP 443, packets using that port are not blocked by any European ISP that I've heard of.
    2. I've used TCP 1443 for SSL VPN in the past, but that was just to keep those tunnels clearly separated from any DNATs, and Web Server Protection where TCP 443 is what the world expects.  In the same vein, I usually configure the User Portal on TCP 2443.
    3. If you have distinct, non-overlapping subnets, you don't need transfer nets as described in How to tunnel between two UTMs which use the same LAN network range.
    4. I've not had a client need to do this, so I didn't keep a record of a recommended way to solve this problem.  If you search here, you'll find several answers.  My preference is for IPsec using X509 authentication: How to create an IPsec Site-to-Site VPN with X509 authentication.
    5. This is basically the same quest as 4.

    Cheers - Bob
    PS One of the unwritten rules practiced here is "One topic per thread" as that makes it easier for others to find answers without having to start their own thread.

     
    Sophos UTM Community Moderator
    Sophos Certified Architect - UTM
    Sophos Certified Engineer - XG
    Gold Solution Partner since 2005
    MediaSoft, Inc. USA
  • Hello Bob

    Many thanks for your reply and your considerations/hints. I am sorry to get back only today - I had  some difficulty to make it work (old cached routes etc. from previous IPsec connections). Now I have some more clearness how the "things" work (also to my previous questions):

    1. Port-Number and Protocol: in UTM 9.7 the settings for the port-number and protocol-type (UDP/TCP) are the same for SSL VPN Remote Access and for SSL VPN Site-To-Site. Thus if the settings are changed in one of the sections (Remote Access or Site-To-Site) the settings change for both SSL VPN types.  Thus it is not possible to separate SSL VPN types (Remote Access or Site-To-Site) by different protocol or ports. The same is true for the SSL VPN IP pool. The IP pool setting is the same for both SSL VPN types. That is somewhat strange, as in other OpenVPN installations every SSL VPN instance can have a different port and protocol
    2.  -
    3. SSL VPN tunnel IP space: UTM 9.7 pushs for the SSL VPN Site-To-Site a corresponding SSL VPN client a complete route where tunnel routing is comprised and SSL VPN tunnel IP space is given by the UTM from the selected SSL VPN pool (default SSL VPN IP pool 10.242.2.0/24). UTM takes 10.242.2.0 and other routers in the routing information will given randomly from this subnet. Thus SSL VPN Remote Access and SSL VPN Site-To-Site clients are sharing the same SSL VPN tunnel IP subnet. If an SSL VPN Site-To-Site profile is given a static virtual IP addresss an additional hop is comprised in the route pushed to the client. The virtual static IP can not be part of the pool.
    4. For the Ubiquity EdgeOS Router I was able to compose an .opvn conform conf file from the UTM .apc file by coping over the corresponding data (certs, key, user password, cipher etc.) where user and password are set in the file "mysite.creds" referenced in the conf-file:

    client
    dev tun
    proto udp
    remote openvpn.yourserver.com 443
    verify-x509-name "C=XX, L=XX, O=XX, CN=XX, emailAddress=XX"
    resolv-retry infinite
    remote-random
    nobind
    persist-key
    persist-tun
    ping 15
    ping-restart 0
    ping-timer-rem
    reneg-sec 0
    comp-lzo yes
    
    hand-window 30
    
    auth-user-pass /config/auth/openvpn-mysite/mysite.creds
    
    route-delay 4
    verb 3
    reneg-sec 0
    fast-io
    cipher AES-128-CBC
    auth SHA512
    
    <ca>
    -----BEGIN CERTIFICATE-----
    [...]
    -----END CERTIFICATE-----
    </ca>
    <cert>
    -----BEGIN CERTIFICATE-----
    [...]
    -----END CERTIFICATE-----
    </cert>
    <key>
    -----BEGIN PRIVATE KEY-----
    [...]
    -----END PRIVATE KEY-----
    </key>

    Best regards,

    André

  • That looks great, André!  Thanks for sharing and helping the next person that needs to make the same connection.

    Cheers - Bob

     
    Sophos UTM Community Moderator
    Sophos Certified Architect - UTM
    Sophos Certified Engineer - XG
    Gold Solution Partner since 2005
    MediaSoft, Inc. USA
Reply
  • That looks great, André!  Thanks for sharing and helping the next person that needs to make the same connection.

    Cheers - Bob

     
    Sophos UTM Community Moderator
    Sophos Certified Architect - UTM
    Sophos Certified Engineer - XG
    Gold Solution Partner since 2005
    MediaSoft, Inc. USA
Children
No Data