When a roadwarrior tries to connect, this is giving me the error
can’t agree on IKE proposal, my config:
enc: aes256-cbc
auth: sha384
dh: modp1536
prf: hmac-sha384
So RouterOS is choosing the proposal of site1, instead of roadwarrior, although site1 has a remote id matcher configured. Both tunnels are IKE2.
If I disable site1, connection for the road warrior works immediately.
Why doesn’t Router OS choose the correct proposal? Can’t I have multiple peers without remote peer address with RouterOS? I have been doing this successfully for like 12 years with other vendors…
So this is working now, I have multiple identities who are using the same peer and profile. I think this is how Mikrotik intends it to be, although it is sad that I can’t have different settings for my various dialup clients: Luckily, I was able to adapt them to match but in a different case that might not have been possible.
It is always difficult to follow other people’s fragmented config and claimed problems, but on my router it works OK using “ip ipsec policy group”, different settings per group, and linking of the identity to the group.
It looks like you already have that, however.
The order of the rules may make some difference.
Yes, I understand that, sorry. I thought too much of the config could be confusing since it is quite extensive.
I think that should be all, regarding IPSEC. Order of which rules do you mean? Of course, I have firewall filter rules in place but they simply allow udp 500, 4500 and protocol 50 ipsec-esp.
Phase 2 settings can be different but phase 1 seem to have to be identical…?
Yes, phase 1 at least has to be compatible for all. There is a chicken-egg problem because the server cannot know the identity of the client before starting phase 1 (especially when you cannot tie that to remote address).
In general I would suggest that, however cute it may be to have all kinds of very modern algorithms and CIA-grade encryption, stay closer to the default.
I don’t know how Fortigate with its FortiOS is doing it but there it was working perfectly, having different phase 1 settings in this scenario.
anyways, it is what it is and I’m happy it is working now at least the way it is.