Hi all,

I am not sure this is the best place to ask, but I don't want to
feel the *BSD wrath against Linux at kame.net, and I could not find
a mailing list for Linux IPsec, so please feel free to point me
elsewhere, but don't shoot, okay?

I configured two 2.6.0 hosts to do simple manually keyed transport
IPsec, just like Ralf (thanks!) wrote at www.ipsec-howto.org. When
I now ping one end from the other, tcpdump reports successful packet
exchanges on both sides:

  10.201.165.118 > 10.201.23.21:
    AH(spi=0x00000200,seq=0x2d): ESP(spi=0x00000201,seq=0x2d) (DF)
  10.201.23.21 > 10.201.165.118:
    AH(spi=0x00000300,seq=0x6): ESP(spi=0x00000301,seq=0x6)

However, the ping application at 10.201.165.118 sees none of the
replies:

  wall:~# ping 10.201.23.21
  PING 10.201.23.21 (10.201.23.21) from 10.201.165.118 : 56(84) bytes of data.

  --- 10.201.23.21 ping statistics ---
  19 packets transmitted, 0 received, 100% loss, time 17997ms

The same applies to normal IP packets (e.g. TCP port 25):

  10.201.165.118 > 10.201.23.21:
    AH(spi=0x00000200,seq=0x2e): ESP(spi=0x00000201,seq=0x2e) (DF)
  10.201.23.21 > 10.201.165.118:
    AH(spi=0x00000300,seq=0x7): ESP(spi=0x00000301,seq=0x7) (DF)
  10.201.165.118 > 10.201.23.21:
    AH(spi=0x00000200,seq=0x2f): ESP(spi=0x00000201,seq=0x2f) (DF)
  10.201.23.21 > 10.201.165.118:
    AH(spi=0x00000300,seq=0x8): ESP(spi=0x00000301,seq=0x8) (DF)
  10.201.23.21 > 10.201.165.118:
    AH(spi=0x00000300,seq=0x9): ESP(spi=0x00000301,seq=0x9) (DF)
  10.201.23.21 > 10.201.165.118:
    AH(spi=0x00000300,seq=0xa): ESP(spi=0x00000301,seq=0xa) (DF)

Would you agree that this is weird? What am I doing wrong?

-- 
martin;              (greetings from the heart of the sun.)
  \____ echo mailto: !#^."<*>"|tr "<*> mailto:" net@madduck
 
invalid/expired pgp subkeys? use subkeys.pgp.net as keyserver!
 
"i love deadlines. i like the whooshing
 sound they make as they fly by."
                                                      -- douglas adams