We have 7 remote offices and 10 tower locations that utilize IPsec tunnels back to our HQ. We now want to force all traffic including web surfing through the tunnels. What would be the easiest way to acomplish this? I have tried utilizing the crypto map policy to do this, but was unable to acomplish this.
Each of our office locationss utilize a Cisco 2811 router and the tower locations utilize a Cisco 881.
I need to route traffic to DMZ (and internal) from the branch office thru the IPSec tunnel. How do I manage that with my Cisco 881?
View 1 Replies View Relatedi measured with Iperf over two Cisco 1811 router, that bandwidth speed is higher then is used IPsec+GRE tunnel between two routers, than just using a static routes.Bandwidth over GRE in average is about 91389Kbit/sec Over static routes is about 88474Kbit/sec.
View 1 Replies View RelatedI have a two RV042 VPN Router, I successfully connected the IPSEC tunnel. I cannot route Traffic in the tunnel. See the diagram.
MAIN Network
10.252.x.x
-------------->
FIREWALL
a.a.a.1
INTERNET
RV042a WANa <<------------------------------->> WANb RV042b
a.a.a.2 b.b.b.b
In this manner the network of b.b.b.b wil connect to the Main Network 10.252.x.x, unfortunately I can't pass traffic to RV042b going to RV042a. Everytime I trace the route, the traffic goes outside the Internet not to RV042a.
I'm station overseas and it's really hard to access certain websites and servie like Netflix or ESPN. What I had created was GRE tunnel from my Home "A" to my current location "B" and route my traffic from point A to B using 2 cisco 1700 routers ( and It was working great) but now I can't use GRE nomore. I still have PIX and ASA on both sides and I was trying to do that over VPN tunnel but I can't ping VPN tunnel gateway( basicly what was next hoop in GRE) on the other end ( which is the main problem why I can't route traffic to remote site). I was wondering if I can still do the same thing over VPN tunnel that I did with GRE tunnel.
View 1 Replies View RelatedWe have a VPN setup and here's the configuration on the Cisco ASA 5505: [code] The problem is that i'm able to ping the otherside of the tunnel i.e. 192.168.23.14 from the dmz IP 172.16.1.2 but i'm unable to ping from the hosts behind the ASA.Also the other side is able to ping 172.16.1.2 IP but no IP's behind the ASA.
View 9 Replies View RelatedAll of my remote sites use various routers to route all of their traffic via IPsec. However, I have one WRVS4400N w/firmware 2.0.2.1 configured with a working tunnel. My issue is I need to set the Remote Group to 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 so all traffic is forced via IPsec tunnel and not out the local gateway. When I do the error, Remote Security Group and Local Security Group cannot be in the same network. However, it works with Cisco/Linksys RV042.
View 3 Replies View RelatedWe have multiple vpn tunnels coming to our cisco asa 5520 , the problem is that when we create another tunnel with the same network as another network on the firewall , it does not know how to route the traffic to which interface or sub interface.
View 2 Replies View Relatedi am curently troubleshooting a ipsec l2l VPN between
1. ASA 7.2(4) to SSG-140
2. Cisco 871W to SSG-140
In both scenario's the tunnel is nicely established, and traffic goes into the tunnel, but nothing comes out. All encap's, but no decap's
It seems like a routing issue, but we can not find anything on both sites.
So maybe i m running into a (known) issue between cisco VPN equipment and the SSG-140?
Could it be a proxy-id issue? Cause they configure stuff like 10.1.1.0/24 and i configure 10.1.1.0 0.0.0.255
I have an issue where I can get traffic to pass from HDQ to two branch offices over our ipsec/gre tunnels even though the tunnels appear to be UP. The HDQ is a 2811, branch is a home office using an 871W and branch runs a 2801 router. I initially had HDQ working fine with the 871W but when I configured branch2 (2801), they both broke. The tunnels appear to be up but traffic is not routing across them. The two 2801 routers run 12.4 (c2800nm-adventerprisek9-mz.124-24.T2.bin). These are gre over ipsec tunnels. Currently traffic flows over an exsting MPLS network that we are getting away from due to cost. As soon as I change the routes to point to the Tunnels, it breaks. Traffic doesn't appear to pass through the tunnel. I have attached my sanitized configs.
HDQ#sh crypto sessCrypto session current status
Interface: FastEthernet0/1Session status: UP-ACTIVEPeer: 205.205.205.21 port 500 IKE SA: local 204.204.204.66/500 remote 205.205.205.21/500 Active IPSEC FLOW: permit 47 0.0.0.0/0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0/0.0.0.0 Active SAs: 4, origin: crypto map IPSEC FLOW:
[Code]....
I have a Site to Site IPSEC VPN Tunnel created with ASDM wizard.
Cisco ASA-5505
Peer A: x.x.x.x
Lan A: 192.168.0.0 255.255.255.0
Fortinet FortiGate-50b
Peer B: y.y.y.y
Lan B: 192.168.23.0 255.255.255.0
I start traffic from LAN B with a ping (or telnet it doesn't matter) that receive no reply but tunnel goes up fine.
"show isakmp sa" seems ok (says "State : MM_ACTIVE")
"show ipsec sa" seems ok but all #pkts are zero
try ftp, telnet from LAN B to LAN A systems but no one work. "show ipsec sa" all #pkts are zero As soon as I generate traffic from LAN A to LAN B these works (with tunnel already up) also traffic from LAN B to LAN A works.Obviously if I end VPN and start tunnel making traffic from LAN A all work fine bidirectionally, LAN A reach LAN B and LAN B reach LAN A.No msg logged in either two appliance.
Seems a very strange problem because seems not related to Phase1 or Phase2 already established.Traffic (routing ?) start works only after at least one packet goes from LAN A to LAN B.No msg logged in either two appliance.Problems begun in ASA version 8.0(4) ASDM version 6.1(3) and remain/continue after upgrade to ASA Version 8.4(1) ASDM version 6.4(1).
We are currently experiencing a problem on an IP SEC VPN tunnel that has all of us here completely stumped. We are hoping that one of you experts out there will be able to assist. Here are some basic details:
NETWORKS
An IPSEC site to site tunnel has been built between the two sites on different networks.
PIX 515E - MAIN SITE
Network 172.16.0.0/24
CISCO 1841 - REMOTE SITE
Network 172.16.99.0/24
ISSUE
All traffic flows over the VPN from the 172.16.99.0 network in the direction of the Pix, such as RDP, SIP etc. Pings will go in both directions across the tunnel. Other than the pings most traffic will NOT flow over the tunnel from the 172.16.0.0 network on the pix to the 172.16.99.0 network on the 1841. It would appear that something on the 1841 is blocking traffic coming in over the tunnel from the 172.16.0.0 network as we can not get a wire shark capture on a PC on the 172.16.99.0 network, other than the ICMP traces. Usually this is an access list problem but we have checked and double checked the configuration and can't see anything.
TROUBLESHOOTING SO FAR
1. Have tried inserting various access list changes to the tunnel on the 1841 to make specific reference to the 172.16.0.0 network.
2. Have tried various NAT entries.
3. Have removed and then recreated the VPN tunnel from a fresh start.
4. Have made the MTU 1400 on the inside interfaces on the Pix and the 1841.
The tunnel is fully up at all times and as we say can ping in both directions.
I have set-up a Linksys BEFVP41 VPN router at home (192.168.1.1 / 255.255.255.0)
View 7 Replies View Related I currently have two Cisco ASA 5505. They are at different physical sites (SITE A, SITE B) and are configured with a site-to-site VPN which is active and working.
I can communicate with the subnets on either site from the other and both are connected to the internet, however I need to ensure that all the traffic at my site B goes through this VPN to my site A.
I changed this access-list : access-list outside_2_cryptomap extended permit ip network_siteB network_siteA to access-list outside_2_cryptomap extended permit ip network_siteB any
But this does not work. If I do [URL], site B IP address is not same that site A.
I am trying to set up a LAN-to-LAN VPN tunnel between two sites. One site has a 5505, and the other site has a 5510. It looks like the tunnel is being established fine (both ISAKMP and IPSEC SAs look OK), but traffic doesn't appear to be routing across the internet between the devices. [code]
View 15 Replies View RelatedI have a Cisco 527w which we are wanting to deploy to our remote sites however i've found a bug. We use ADSL with an IPsec tunnel as primary and 3G APN for failover . When the ADSL goes down the route via the IPSec tunnel remains and i am unable to route the traffic via the APN backup without disabling the VPN tunnel .
View 0 Replies View RelatedI have an IPSec tunnel configured on my Cisco 1941. The other device is an ZyXEL router.I can see the tunnel is up but there is no traffic.This comes out the show crypto ipsec sa
interface: Dialer1
Crypto map tag: CMAP_AVW, local addr 10.10.10.89
protected vrf: (none)
local ident (addr/mask/prot/port): (192.168.200.0/255.255.255.0/0/0)
remote ident (addr/mask/prot/port): (192.168.150.0/255.255.255.0/0/0)
current_peer 20.20.20.161 port 500
[code]....
I've replaced real networkID to the one mentined below.
Topology: classical IPSec VPN tunnel between two Cisco 892s, with pre-shared key and no GRE. One 892 (branch_892) has access to the Internet via PPPoE and has three networks/vlans behind it. One VLAN is NATed to access internet via the PPPoE. Access to two other VLANs - VL92 (100.100.200.0/24) and VL93 (100.100.100.0/24) need is done thrue the VPN tunnel.
Second 892 (892_DC) has just one interface - WAN on Gigabit enabled/connected and has a static route to the default GW. It does not have any interal network defined. So the router is strictly used to send traffic for VL92/VL93 to the branch 892 via IPSec tunnel.
Here is the problem: access to/from VL93 (100.100.100.0/24) works, however for VL92 (100.100.100.0/24) - does not.
From devices in VL92 I can ping the 892_DC IP address across the VPN tunnel. From the 892_DC router I can also ping devices in VL92. However I can no ping from VL92 any device beyond the 892_DC and at the same time packet arriving on 892_DC for VL92 are not sent out via the VPN tunnel.
I took the packet trace on 892_DC using capture point/buffer to capute packets for VL92 and could see that traffic does arrive at the 892_DC. I run the same capute on Branch_892 and there was not a single packet.More interesting I modified the access list such a way that left on VL92 and still - no packets are sent out thru the tunnel. [code]
We have problems on central firewall with restricting traffic coming from remote office from IPsec. (The network sheme is attached) All branch offices are connected to central asa though IPsec. The main aim is to rule access from branch offices only on the central firewall, NOT on each IPsec tunnel According to the sheme:172.16.1.0/24 is on of the branch office LANs10.1.1.0/24 and 10.2.2.0/24 are central office LANThe crypto ACL looks like permit ip 172.16.1.0/24 10.0.0.0/8 the aim is to restrict access from 172.16.1.0/24 to 10.1.1.0/24 When packets are generated from host 10.1.1.10 to 172.16.1.0/24 all is ok - they are dropped by acl2 When packets are generated from 172.16.1.0/24 to 10.1.1.10 they are not dropped by any ACL - the reason is stateful firewall - traffic bypasses all access lists on a back path I thought that TCP State Bypass feature can solve this problem and disable stateful firewall inspection for traffic coming from 172.16.1.0/24 to 10.1.1.0/24, but it didn't work.The central asa 5500 is configured according to cisco doc [URL]
access-list tcp_bypass_acl extended permit tcp 172.16.1.0 255.255.255.0 10.1.1.0 255.255.255.0
!
class-map tcp_bypass_map
description "TCP traffic that bypasses stateful firewall"
match access-list tcp_bypass_acl
[code].....
Is it at all possible to channel all/some data traffic through an established ipsec tunneled connection using the RVL200? I have successfully established an ipsec connection through RVL200 and RV042 routers and are able to connect to servers/computers behind it.Now I want to channel all or some traffic through the ipsec-tunnel for computers that reside on 192.168.1.0 subnet of RVL200 network.
Main office - RV042 router - 10.200.62.1
Remote office - RVL200 router - 192.168.1.1
I am trying to use the Advanced Routing option to add static routes but I am not 100% sure if I am configuring the routes correctly.To give an example of routing DNS requests for HOTMAIL.COM [65.55.72.183]: [code]For some reason this does not appear to work. I have also tried using the interface setting of WAN and tested - this also does not work.
i'm using an rv220W and i whant to know if is it possible to assign vpn traffic to a vlan when i setup an ipsec tunnel?
example:
Im using different vlans on my rv220W.
Vlan 10: engineers (ex: 192.168.1.0/27) no intervlan routing
Vlan20: sales (ex: 10.0.123.0/24) no intervlan routing
This is what i need: - An engineer is on the road and when he makes a ipsec vpn connection => assignd to the vlan "engineers" so he can access the server/pc's in that vlan.and when someone from the sales group starts a vpn connection he needs to be in the vlan "sales" so he can access his pc/data,...
This has to be the most weirdest issue I have seen since the past year on my ASA. I have an ASA 5540 running the 8.4(2) code without any issues until I stumbled upon this problem last week and I have spent sleepless nights with no resolution! So, take a deep breath and here is a brief description of my setup and the problem:
A Simple IPSEC tunnel between my ASA 5540 8.4(2) and a Juniper SSG 140 screen OS 6.3.0r9.0(route based VPN)
The tunnel comes up without any issues but the ASA refuses to encrypt the traffic but decrypts it with GLORY! below are some debug outputs, show outputs and a packet tracer output which also has an explanation of my WEIRD NAT issue:
My setup - ( I wont get into the tunnel encryption details as my tunnel negotiations are **** perfect and comes up right off the bat when the ASA is configured as answer only)
CISCO ASA - IPSec networking details
LOCAL NETWORK - 10.2.4.0/28
REMOTE NETWORK - 192.168.171.8/32
JUNIPER SSG 140 - IPSec networking details
PROXY ID: LOCAL NETWORK - 192.168.171.8/32
REMOTE NETWORK - 10.2.4.0/28
HOST NAME# sh cry ipsec sa peer <JUNIPER SSG PEER>
peer address: <JUNIPER SSG PEER>
[code]...
As you can see, there is no echo reply packet at all as the packet is not being encapsulated while it is being sent back. I have been going mad with this. Also, this is a live production multi tenant firewall with no issues at all apart from this ****** ip sec tunnel to a juniper!!
Also, the 192.168.10.0/24 is another IP Sec tunnel remote network to this 10.2.4.0/28 network and this IP SEC tunnel has a similar Juniper SSG 140 screen os 6.3.0r9.0 at the remote end and this woks like a charm without any issues, but the 171 is not being encrypted by the ASA at all.
I'm in process of purchasing a new Cisco routers for our branches that will be used primary to enable IPSec virtual tunnel interfce with "tunnel mode ipsec ipv4". does the default IOS IP Base supports this feature? or i need to purchase DATA license or SECURITY license?
View 4 Replies View RelatedI am using a Cisco RV110W (Firmware 1.2.09) in a branch and I would like to create a VPN Tunnel to another site that has a Cisco RV042 (firmware v4.2.1.02)
What would be the correct Configuration? the current configuration I am using is
in the RV042 i am using
Check Enable
Local Group Setup
Local Security Gateway Type : IP Only
IP Address : RV042 Pulbic IP address
[Code].....
i have a 7201 router with NPE-G2. i have a design which i have the option to send all the traffic through a GRE tunnel or a L2TPV3 tunnel.which method is more CPU consumption ?
View 1 Replies View RelatedEnvironment :linksys wrt300n v1.1 which can have ddwrt-mega. Willing to tunnel all lan's outbound traffic through an ssh tunnel.
View 2 Replies View RelatedI have a Cisco 819 router and it's the first time I've configured any Cisco product. Starting from scratch, I have managed to get 3G working and the VPN to connect but so far no packets can route down the VPN tunnel (the other side is openswan/shorewall on CentOS5).I've been pawing over lots of guides and forum discussions but seem to be a bit lost. I suspect I'm missing some access-list definitions but don't really know how to go about it. I want the network behind the Cisco 819 (10.x.x.0/20) to be able to access the internet through the interface Cellular 0 but also the VPN remote network (192.y.y.0/24)When I ping from the other (non-cisco) end I see on the Cisco 819.
View 9 Replies View RelatedCisco device is neighbored up with a Brocade device via OSPF, and the desired routes are present.This Brocade device is neighbored up with another Brocade device via OSPF over a GRE tunnel. I am not seeing the desired routes present.What kinds of things can I look at to determine the issue? I think I've viewed the OSPF topology database (I'm not that familiar with Brocade) with the show ip ospf routes command and I'm not seeing the desired routes there either.There is no form of route filtering in place. I'll double check, but I do not believe there is any stub routing going on either.
View 12 Replies View RelatedGot a problem routing trafic to my L2L tunnel...
Got an ASA5505 Sec+ with ip 10.45.10.1 on inside interface. Firmware 8.3(1). Got another Cisco router (From my ISP) with ip 10.45.10.254 - This one creates an L2L tunnel - To the 10.45.20.0/24 net.
On the 5505 ive got "route inside 10.45.20.0 255.255.255.0 10.45.10.254 1", and trafic is being directed to 10.45.10.254 as it should.
I know cause I can ping everything one the 10.45.20.0/24 net - But thats it... Cant RDP, connect to fileshare... Nothing.
When i test a PC and set it to gateway 10.45.10.254 I can access everything on the remote network. Do I need some NAT command or an access-list? I've setup AnyConnect VPN on the ASA and I can connect to both networks without any problems.
- Ipsec tunnell between two 881's
- An Aruba access point trying to set up a tunnell back to controller through the ipsec tunnell, on udp 4500
- Even though traffic shouldn't be NAT'ed (and other traffic is not), udp 4500 is NAT'ed
I guess this might be default behaviour, thing is that it used to work when it was set up as a route based easy vpn.
how to create ip sec tunnel using these parameters. customer ip where tunnel has to be connected 1.1.1.1
ISAKMP Parameters: (Phase I)
Encryption: AES-256 or 3DES
Authentication Mode: Pre-shared key
[Code]......
We have a Cisco 2820 that serves as a hub and our spokes are Cisco 871s. Its been working for a while and for some reason last week. Http and https traffic over the tunnel is having connection issues. I can Remote desktop or PCanywhere into the remote PCs. From that PC I can ping internal IP address or IP of the webmail server or internal webserver with no issue. But if I access it over the browser it times out or it will work and stop working again. Basically ica, icmp, pcanythere, rdp traffic works over the tunnel but not http or https.
View 2 Replies View Relatedcan I force an IPSEC L2L tunnel to use NAT-T encapsulation no matter what? Automatic detection says none of the endpoints are behind NAT. I know I can disable it by the "crypto map XXX set nat-t-disable" command, but I want the exact opposite.
I have a very strange issue where asynchronos routing is making my life as a technician very hard.
A side question; Can I do something about an ISP that is policy-base-routing its ESP traffic (and/or translating it)?
ASA5505 ===>===>===> ISAKMP traffic ===>===>===> ASA5510
212.178.155.73 80.62.yyy.xxx (traffic source IP: 212.178.155.73)
[Code].....