Routing between two interface

[aleled]

Dear Experts,

I have a linux Debian 12 machine hosted on a virtual machine (linode).
It has two physical interfaces:
eth0 - WAN - with access to www - not relevant for the question.
eth1 - LAN - Manually configured with a static ip address 10.99.0.1/24.

Then i have another virtual interface
wg1 - LAN - Manually configured with a static ip address 10.97.0.1/24

eth1 is used as the endpoint for all VPN connections towards site-to-site / clients. using ipsec proto.
wg1 is used as the endpoint for all VPN connections used for employees, using wireguard vpn.

The VPNs are working fine:
Site-to-site, the tunnels are up and I can ping from the server all sites .1 ip address.
Employee vpn, the employee has the VPN installed on its PC. The tunnel is up and can ping the server.

nd1

The problem is actually achieving "connecting" between the employee PC to the remote sites.
At the moment I am not using firewall of any kind to keep things simple and avoid more doubts.


SERVER SIDE

Code: Select all

root@be1:~#ip a
3: eth1: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc mq state UP group default qlen 1000
    link/ether 90:de:01:af:97:36 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
    inet 10.99.0.1/24 brd 10.99.0.255 scope global eth1
       valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
    inet6 fe80::92de:1ff:feaf:9736/64 scope link
       valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
4: wg1: <POINTOPOINT,NOARP,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1420 qdisc noqueue state UNKNOWN group default qlen 1000
    link/none
    inet 10.97.0.1/24 scope global wg1
       valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
       
root@be1:~#ip route
10.97.0.0/24 dev wg1 proto kernel scope link src 10.97.0.1
10.99.0.0/24 dev eth1 proto kernel scope link src 10.99.0.1

EMPLOYEE PC

Code: Select all

C:\Users\4lele>ipconfig

Unknown adapter BE1:

   Connection-specific DNS Suffix  . :
   IPv4 Address. . . . . . . . . . . : 10.97.0.11
   Subnet Mask . . . . . . . . . . . : 255.255.255.255
   Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . :


C:\Users\4lele>route print -4
IPv4 Route Table
===========================================================================
Active Routes:
Network Destination        Netmask          Gateway       Interface  Metric
        10.97.0.1  255.255.255.255         On-link        10.97.0.11      5
       10.97.0.11  255.255.255.255         On-link        10.97.0.11    261
        10.99.0.1  255.255.255.255         On-link        10.97.0.11      5
       10.100.0.0      255.255.0.0         On-link        10.97.0.11      5
      10.100.14.0    255.255.255.0         On-link        10.97.0.11      5
    10.100.14.255  255.255.255.255         On-link        10.97.0.11    261
===========================================================================
Persistent Routes:
  None

C:\Users\4lele>ping 10.99.0.1

Pinging 10.99.0.1 with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 10.99.0.1: bytes=32 time=17ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.99.0.1: bytes=32 time=16ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.99.0.1: bytes=32 time=16ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.99.0.1: bytes=32 time=16ms TTL=64

Ping statistics for 10.99.0.1:
    Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 16ms, Maximum = 17ms, Average = 16ms

C:\Users\4lele>ping 10.100.14.1

Pinging 10.100.14.1 with 32 bytes of data:
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.

Ping statistics for 10.100.14.1:
    Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 0, Lost = 4 (100% loss),

If there's anything else, information please comment and i will reply.

Regards,
Ale.

[ruwolf]

Hello.

We are users, only very few of us are experts.

Nobody has answered you, yet; so simplest (maybe dumb) question from non-expert: Do you have enabled forwarding between those interfaces?

BTW, nice picture.

[Aki]

The network configuration (as described) is designed to avoid what you are asking for. Perhaps you can explain why.

——
note: Discussion moved to “Off-topic” sub-forum.

[aleled]

Dear Aki,

Can you please explain the flaw in my design that causes it to avoid?

Regards,
Ale.