Static route through Netscreen Remote: can it be done?

Jun 06, 2005 4 Replies
Static route through Netscreen Remote: can it be done? open original image

Hi -



My network is acessible by via a VPN tunnel via Netscreen Remote 8.3 to a Netscreen 5GT. The trust interface is 192.168.0.1. Connections to



192.168.0.0/24 hosts from my users' remote PCs work fine. However, we have a 10.0.0.0/24 network whose gateway is at 192.168.0.2. Unfortunately, there seems to be no way to tell Windows 2000 to route packets to 10.0.0.0/24 via
192.168.0.1, because the "deterministic network enhancer" which is used by the Netscreen Remote software is under the radar of basic Windows 2000 TCP/IP. That is, "route ADD 10.0.0.0 MASK 255.255.255.0 192.168.0.2 METRIC
1 IF 0x2" does not work, because not unreasonably, there is no official route to the 192.168.0.0/24 subnet.

Does anybody know whether it is possible to hack this so 10.0.0.0/24 packets are sent down the invisible VPN interface? Looking at the Netscreen Remote software, there doesn't appear to be any way to add this, short of creating a completely separate tunnel for this interface (I imagine that I would have to bind a 10.0.0.x address to a new VPN gateway, somehow).



Any ideas?


-- Mark Bertenshaw Kingston upon Thames UK


You need to add another subnet to the existing tunnel or if your user interface only allows a single local and a single remote subnet when defining a tunnel then you will need to create a second tunnel to the same endpoint.

That's what I thought. All rather annoying.

-- Mark

NetScreen remote / 5GT will allow you to create a second connection.

Open NS Remote > right click your current "green lock" > copy > paste now change the subnet to 10.0.0.0/24 rather than 192.x

Open the NetScreen firewall > policies > create a second dialup vpn policy matching the proxy id for the 10.0.0.0/24 network

this is very simple, you will not have to create a 2nd vpn tunnel.

regards

Dave Sinclair

formatting link
NetScreen/Juniper Certified Trainer

Dave -

Thanks very much! It now works absolutely fine.

-- Mark Bertenshaw Kingston upon Thames UK

Join the Discussion

Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.

Didn't find your answer?

Ask the community — no account required