Hello. Need some advice here. I installed two gwn7000 set them up for site to site for openvpn as it is explained on the user guide everything seems fine client connects to server but i have only one way communication as i ping from main site(server gwn) to branch and every device behind client gwn answer ping request, but when i ping from branc site to main i cant see anything although i see open vpn connected. Checked subnets and static routes and everything seems fine. Any thoughts?
Did you ever get an answer for this. My setup is doing the same thing. Reached out to support with no answer for over 1 week. Thank you for any assistance you can office.
To the best of my knowledge site-to-site OpenVPN tunnels using the GWN7000 at both ends is not currently working; fixes are supposed to be included in the long awaited forthcoming firmware upgrade.
Attempting site to site OpenVPN on 22.214.171.124 firmwares and getting the same result.
I never was able to resolve this, my need passed, and I moved on. Back then I was told “the next firmware release should solve this”.
I suggest you open a Help Desk ticket. Please update the thread if you resolve this.
Just reviewed the original post. It sounds like a known issue on 1.0.4.x.
1.0.6.x should have most known VPN issue resolved. Are the following issues reported on 1.0.6.x?
@GS_Tian, sorry but I haven’t tested this. Back then I was operating between cites in two cities. I’m now consolidated in one location. But, it is certainly something that I am interested in for when a client need comes up.
No probelm. I do see vpn questions time to time even internally. On 1.0.6.x, most of them can be sort out by just correcting some configurations. We will update our docs.
The problem of the openvpn site to site could be solved
It could be, but my take is that the GWN7000 is not a very viable product. There has been no observable development since August 2018 and while there was a release in February 2019, it was a bug fix to increase the throughput for PPOE and a security fix, which added nothing new nor made any attempt to address many of the requests made by users.
I had hopes for it and looked to it as a complement to the IP Telephony products, along with the added benefit of being a controller for the AP products, but I guess that GS has had some other thoughts given the lack of any “noise” coming out from their side. 9 months is an awful long time in today’s market to be so quite. It was a promising box at a very attractive price point, but perhaps the vision was overly grand.
I have moved on from the device…sadly.