Re: RWW vs. VPN
- From: "JAStillwell" <JAStillwell@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 5 Aug 2005 12:22:02 -0700
Once I put the server on the DMZ, it works fine...so I'll check the settings
you mention. I don't particularly want to have the server totally exposed on
the DMZ, so I would like to find the culprit. According to Qwest/Actiontec,
PPTP is setup already to allow up to 8 VPN sessions without making any
adjustments.
Thanks!
"Joe" wrote:
> JAStillwell wrote:
> > Dave,
> >
> > Thanks for the follow-up.
> >
> > With a couple other VPN connections, I can connect in about 5-10 seconds--it
> > logs in and authorizes them quickly. This one looks like it finds the
> > server, then stops on "Verifying User Name and Password..." for about a
> > minute, then pops up with an "Error 721: The remote computer did not
> > respond". My guess is that the Actiontec router (which I configured to allow
> > the SBS port forwarding) is not forwarding! It's weird that I can connect to
> > RWW on the same FQDN. I have tried the simple stuff like double-check the
> > user name and password, use a different login, etc.
> >
> > The network is setup as follows:
> >
> > - Actiontec DSL router gets IP from Qwest; has IP of 10.0.0.1 on the LAN side.
> > - SBS NIC #1 (WAN) connects to Actiontec @ IP 10.0.0.2.
> > - SBS NIC #2 (LAN) connects to network switch @ IP 192.168.1.1.
> > - Client workstation is 192.168.1.120.
> >
> > Again, I can connect via a no-ip.com FQDN to RWW and admin the server, and
> > connect to the workstation, but no VPN authentication.
> >
> > Other clients that I have setup almost identical servers have (a) Comcast
> > cable modem connecting to a Linksys firewall, (b) XO T1 connected to a
> > firewall. In both cases, I can connect via VPN to either an IP or FQDN. On
> > those servers I didn't spend any time setting up any extra port forwarding,
> > either.
> >
> > As far as RWW vs. VPN, in this partiuclar case I would like to have the
> > client connect via VPN so that she can VNC into her computer at the office.
> > The office runs a 4D server database that is kind of old and seems very
> > particular about what other TCP/IP activity is going on on the workstation.
> > In fact, it won't access the server database at all if Microsoft Windows
> > Updates are running!
> >
> > Otherwise, RWW seems to work fine. I can connect to the desktop no problem
> > after running the Network Connection. As I said, though, I would like to use
> > VPN.
> >
>
> That looks very much like GRE (protocol 47) trouble. RWW uses only
> TCP/IP, and the housekeeping on TCP port 1723 seems to be working.
> What isn't happening is the data transfer on protocol 47.
>
> Some routers don't mentions protocols specifically, and just quietly
> forward 47 when you only ask for TCP/1723, others have something
> explicitly called 'PPTP passthrough' or similar, which passes both.
>
> Presumably if either of these were true of your router, there would
> be no trouble, so have another look in the manual to find anything
> about forwarding protocols other than TCP/IP.
>
> This 47 is an IP protocol, not a port of TCP or UDP, but it seems that a
> few braindead routers refer to it as 'port 47'. If you can't get there
> any other way you might try forwarding this to see if it helps.
>
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: RWW vs. VPN
- From: cjobes
- Re: RWW vs. VPN
- References:
- RWW vs. VPN
- From: JAStillwell
- Re: RWW vs. VPN
- From: Dave Nickason [SBS MVP]
- Re: RWW vs. VPN
- From: JAStillwell
- Re: RWW vs. VPN
- From: Joe
- RWW vs. VPN
- Prev by Date: Re: RWW vs. VPN
- Next by Date: Re: Limiting Access through RDP on the server
- Previous by thread: Re: RWW vs. VPN
- Next by thread: Re: RWW vs. VPN
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|