[Question] support for same subnet #17

New issue

Closed

opened 2022-10-20 02:56:21 -04:00 by andy-vm · 4 comments

andy-vm commented

2022-10-20 02:56:21 -04:00

(Migrated from github.com)

Hi may I ask if the vpn supports VMs within same subnet but across different locations, as shown below:

can I only install the VPN on the 2 servers itself then route packet for all 4 VMs in the 2 servers?

[main]
port = 23456
broadcast = 192.168.2.255
netcidr = 24
recvThreads = 4
sendThreads = 4

[remote "prague"]
ExtIP = 10.0.0.2
LocIP = 192.168.2.2
route = 192.168.2.0/24

[remote "berlin"]
ExtIP = 10.0.0.3
LocIP = 192.168.2.1
route = 192.168.2.0/24

Hi may I ask if the vpn supports VMs within same subnet but across different locations, as shown below: can I only install the VPN on the 2 servers itself then route packet for all 4 VMs in the 2 servers? ![image](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/108446482/196877008-81974c5d-ba32-4104-8098-29e9a69763c4.png) [main] port = 23456 broadcast = 192.168.2.255 netcidr = 24 recvThreads = 4 sendThreads = 4 [remote "prague"] ExtIP = 10.0.0.2 LocIP = 192.168.2.2 route = 192.168.2.0/24 [remote "berlin"] ExtIP = 10.0.0.3 LocIP = 192.168.2.1 route = 192.168.2.0/24

kanocz commented

2022-10-20 03:11:24 -04:00

(Migrated from github.com)

not in this case :(
lcvpn has ip-based routing, it doesn't have "link-layer" that allow you to use arp and then use something like "proxy arp" or "bridge"
the only option is to divide /24 for example in 2x /25 network
so first one will be 192.168.2.1 with route 192.168.2.0/25 (VMs on 192.168.2.3-127)
and the second 192.168.2.129 with route 192.168.2.128/25 (VMs 192.168.2.130-254)
but this not much different from using 2x /24 subnets

not in this case :( lcvpn has ip-based routing, it doesn't have "link-layer" that allow you to use arp and then use something like "proxy arp" or "bridge" the only option is to divide /24 for example in 2x /25 network so first one will be 192.168.2.1 with route 192.168.2.0/25 (VMs on 192.168.2.3-127) and the second 192.168.2.129 with route 192.168.2.128/25 (VMs 192.168.2.130-254) but this not much different from using 2x /24 subnets

andy-vm commented

2022-10-20 03:15:02 -04:00

(Migrated from github.com)

thanks for the prompt reply
does it work if I use vxlan to connect both servers?

thanks for the prompt reply does it work if I use vxlan to connect both servers?

kanocz commented

2022-10-20 03:41:28 -04:00

(Migrated from github.com)

vxlan uses ethernet-level packets, so it looks like possible solution

l0k18 commented

2022-10-20 04:50:49 -04:00

(Migrated from github.com)

Not sure if this will help or no, but I wrote this to handle correctly avoiding listening on higher priority VPN ports and enabling LAN and loopback peering between instances of my servers: https://github.com/cybriq/p9/blob/main/pkg/util/routeable/routeable.go. It exploits the fact that VPN tunnels don't have multicast capability and uses routing table information to help filter them.

Not sure if this will help or no, but I wrote this to handle correctly avoiding listening on higher priority VPN ports and enabling LAN and loopback peering between instances of my servers: [https://github.com/cybriq/p9/blob/main/pkg/util/routeable/routeable.go](https://github.com/cybriq/p9/blob/main/pkg/util/routeable/routeable.go). It exploits the fact that VPN tunnels don't have multicast capability and uses routing table information to help filter them.

No labels

No milestone

No project

No assignees

1 participant

Notifications

Due date

The due date is invalid or out of range. Please use the format "yyyy-mm-dd".

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference

kanocz/lcvpn#17

No description provided.

Rows
Columns