IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [IPsec] Can one IPsec SA be established via two internet ports on one device?

joel jaeggli <joelja@gmail.com> Mon, 19 November 2018 20:17 UTC

Return-Path: <joelja@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ipsec@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipsec@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7966C129BBF for <ipsec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 19 Nov 2018 12:17:44 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id VXH6q2dhWrZy for <ipsec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 19 Nov 2018 12:17:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pf1-x433.google.com (mail-pf1-x433.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::433]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B60DA1292F1 for <ipsec@ietf.org>; Mon, 19 Nov 2018 12:17:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pf1-x433.google.com with SMTP id h3so8835741pfg.1 for <ipsec@ietf.org>; Mon, 19 Nov 2018 12:17:42 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=kLb0WH2AVFf4kgFliZdNcWciOzuxZ80vSnRKpXPzRgI=; b=Gb886JTblubI8xhl3jkxg6Fsm6RpKBJDF/+Pi6RsTpymi+9fh0+x47NAN/4olBbDQc MPl+jdclWiVyHUwQslk4rK+mCeZ04nfN75jEnRNJrC0MDCs+Ibpo7Dc6w0IoHqKwYcF5 YSFezjoBZ0LObOT0CHcc/fIP/HukkNCBZPi83+50Jowm2UTRDwV7/WOAz2/peDQlanWL acKZC9A/puv0LqyfyNtktbXKyiZhx0JZrQXY8OLo/KA2IrCON5tMjChcPH3ifYE5pfrz 1wBcYFGmCCsLwoJPzxcadRcIApJ2dtMT7DZXkfBs26GwXbV9ZOYqFtFqgnpYO0gJ97kZ sdFA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=kLb0WH2AVFf4kgFliZdNcWciOzuxZ80vSnRKpXPzRgI=; b=VFXwS8HvbI6MoMfPIMc6tZoTl0zx5UbnPCEvOwdaBG4vA7+Q/gY+QNKqki1eYY33jH T2rfKESZtxtASle6vR+wDOjFe2QrtKjwwlE8pfhvvuFzNuHTBkm3BZ3dUfGiPY3rB705 b5WdI6tH11yaG+PEpBr4dNVZdwxPp4RlSbPCI2nuGljtakLosd0ACnA8R8GlJAVswKcN Syq8WMkPHSF1JoEDsqP+6iXg+FEuShPy0IAQalU+9o2DYa+hTEBjsxR/nMbiGVqDEduh hTP0Xy8GjdO22lE1AF5z9AmhD5BLXm6eNi2x2crLP7NTZYIR0J4Re1w5F3I7bn+QqKor 6BRw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AGRZ1gL62+O9lhAPitD+U+GrzRve6YP07Ks2qz7Ig1Koy6w5nJDzvG4d aridaS1RC4wPdZiXgK8znpU=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AJdET5fiXc3HAnLxRGqAmAbVcWwmqAv23liSZlqyovD1Gu9fHK54IfBXX8Mx3NrWytyqb2HdTk7vjg==
X-Received: by 2002:a62:e201:: with SMTP id a1mr11711207pfi.75.1542658662028; Mon, 19 Nov 2018 12:17:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ?IPv6:2601:1c0:cb00:da11:c1aa:1c99:72de:336c? ([2601:1c0:cb00:da11:c1aa:1c99:72de:336c]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id e23sm53212574pfh.68.2018.11.19.12.17.41 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 19 Nov 2018 12:17:41 -0800 (PST)
From: joel jaeggli <joelja@gmail.com>
Message-Id: <06E267FB-9751-44FF-887D-E0A304A58C85@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_D27A097B-02A9-4962-AE35-200873A60B05"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.1 \(3445.101.1\))
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2018 12:17:40 -0800
In-Reply-To: <4A95BA014132FF49AE685FAB4B9F17F66B1C8D3B@sjceml521-mbx.china.huawei.com>
Cc: IPsecME WG <ipsec@ietf.org>
To: Linda Dunbar <linda.dunbar@huawei.com>
References: <4A95BA014132FF49AE685FAB4B9F17F66B1C8D3B@sjceml521-mbx.china.huawei.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.101.1)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipsec/I5ULY8XjlJ2Y63jIohnHRmntwgk>
Subject: Re: [IPsec] Can one IPsec SA be established via two internet ports on one device?
X-BeenThere: ipsec@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion of IPsec protocols <ipsec.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ipsec>, <mailto:ipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ipsec/>
List-Post: <mailto:ipsec@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec>, <mailto:ipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2018 20:17:44 -0000


> On Nov 19, 2018, at 11:19, Linda Dunbar <linda.dunbar@huawei.com <mailto:linda.dunbar@huawei.com>> wrote:
> 
> IPsec experts, 
>  
> In the following diagram, CPE1 has two internet ports, A1 by one service provider, A2 by another service provider.
> CPE2 also have two ports facing two different internet service providers
>  
> Question: can I establish ONE IPsec SA between CPE1 & CPE2? (i.e. between 10.1.1.1 & 10.1.2.1)?
> But the actual packets sent out from A1 port has to use A1 as Source-Address, and using B1 or other public address as Destination address.


If in your example the source and destination IPs are sourced loopbacks that are part of a prefix exported to  the the isp(s) in each site then you could in fact have one association…

If the CPEs are using a provider assigned ip for tunnel termination  you’re going to need 4.

We do the former all the time with sites multi-homed via bgp.

>  
> Or is it necessary to have one IPsec SA between A1<->B1, one IPsec SA between A1<->B2, one IPsec SA between A2<->B1, and one IPsec SA between A2<->B2?
>                                            
>  
> <image001.png>
>  
> Thanks, Linda Dunbar
> _______________________________________________
> IPsec mailing list
> IPsec@ietf.org <mailto:IPsec@ietf.org>
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email