Hi Christian, First of all I've made a mistake. I meant 192.168.1.0/24, not192.168.1.0/8, but that doesn't change anything relevant. On Mon, Jul 7, 2008 at 6:54 PM, Christian Grunfeld<christian.grunfeld@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:> Hi,>> the network should be the same on both ends but tunnel interfaces> should be diferent. I'm not sure what you mean. The tunnel interfaces obviously must bedifferent logically, because a connection has two endpoints and twodistinct interfaces must represent them, even if they can be named thesame, like tun1 and tun1. I have two networks and both of them have the network address of192.168.1.0/24 and 192.168.1.0/24. This is what I meant. I know thatthey'll be merged once the VPN is set up. My experience is that SSH VPN doesn't work in this situation, see myprevious mail. This is pretty unpleasant since most of the LANs I'veencountered are either 192.168.0.0/24 or 192.168.1.0/24 and changingtheir network addresses is an administrative pain. Correct me if I'mwrong, though. I think I'll give OpenVPN a try. > 2008/7/7 László Monda <laci@xxxxxxxx>:>> Hi List,>>>> I'm trying to build an SSH VPN based on the>> https://help.ubuntu.com/community/SSH_VPN Ubuntu howto, but can't get>> it done.>>>> After setting up the VPN and trying to connect to the remote host>> which is now on my virtual network I realize that I actually connect>> to localhost.>>>> This may be because the remote network and the local network are both>> 192.168.1.0/8. Do the network adresses of the networks in question>> need to differ?>>>> Thanks in advance!>>>> -->> Laci <http://monda.hu>>>> -- Laci <http://monda.hu>
