Cisco VPN :: ASA 5520 / IPSec Over TCP - IKE Initiator Unable To Find Policy?
Jun 9, 2012
I've tried to set up IPSec over TCP with a VPN-Client V5.0.07.0440 on Win 7 64b to my ASA 5520 (Version 8.2(2)16) regarding to
[URL]
IPSec over TCP activated at the ASA
crypto isakmp ipsec-over-tcp port 10000
and in the transport tap of the VPN connection 'enable transport tunneling' with IPSec over TCP an port 10000 instead of 'IPSec over UDP' The connect timed out with error code 412 And this is my log from the ASA:
%ASA-7-710005: TCP request discarded from 178.x.x.x/53225 to INTERNET:212.x.x.x/10000
%ASA-3-713042: IKE Initiator unable to find policy: Intf INTERNET, Src: 212.x.x.x, Dst: 178.x.x.x
%ASA-7-710005: TCP request discarded from 178.x.x.x/53225 to INTERNET:212.x.x.x/10000
%ASA-3-713042: IKE Initiator unable to find policy: Intf INTERNET, Src: 212.x.x.x, Dst: 178.x.x.x
I don't have a clue what's here missing.I have static crypto maps for the L2L tunnels and the default dynamic crypto map for the VPN clients which come over NAT-T
crypto map INTERNET_map 65535 ipsec-isakmp dynamic SYSTEM_DEFAULT_CRYPTO_MAP
crypto dynamic-map SYSTEM_DEFAULT_CRYPTO_MAP 65535 match address INTERNET_cryptomap_65535.65535
crypto dynamic-map SYSTEM_DEFAULT_CRYPTO_MAP 65535 set pfs
crypto dynamic-map SYSTEM_DEFAULT_CRYPTO_MAP 65535 set transform-set ESP-AES-256-SHA ESP-AES-256-MD5 ESP-3DES-SHA ESP-3DES-MD5
crypto dynamic-map SYSTEM_DEFAULT_CRYPTO_MAP 65535 set reverse-route
I keep getting this on a site to site VPN tunnel that I have established to one of our remote offices. EVERYTHING works fine except for the phones. Everytime they try to connect I get a flood of the below error3Nov 01 201116:06:38IKE Initiator unable to find policy: Intf DS3, Src: 10.90.4.6, Dst: 10.10.20.2010.90.4.0 is our phones vla10.10.20.0 is the remote site network .20 is one of the ip phones located thereried running it through packet tracer and get this...I'm not sure where the problem is, as I said ALL domain traffic is flowing back and forth with no issues.
I am testing VPN tunnels in a lab. I have the following (simple) setup:
-one ASA5505 has an "inside" interface with address 192.16.99.40/24 and an "outside" interface with address 205.192.0.2/24 -one computer with address 192.16.99.1/24 ("Client") is connected to the "inside" interface -one ASA5510 has an "inside" interface with address 192.0.99.40/24 and an "outside" interface with address 205.192.0.1/24 -one computer with address 192.0.99.1/24 ("Server") is connected to the "inside" interface -both "outside" interfaces are connected through a layer 2 switch
I had a VPN tunnel between them using "Main mode", and that worked without a problem.But in my target system, the ASA5505 will be connected to a router with a dynamic IP address, and so I need to use "Aggressive mode", where the ASA5510 will have a static address on the "outside" interface. The ASA5505 will therefore initiate the VPN session.
I am using the ASDM, by the way.I have the VPN tunnel established, but I am unable to ping from either side.When I ping the Server from the Client, the ASA5505 gives me the expected "Built/Teardown ICMP connection...", but the ASA5510 says "IKE Initiator unable to find policy: Intf inside, Src: 192.0.99.1, Dst: 192.16.99.1". So the ping makes it to the Server, but the reply can't find its way back out.When I ping the client from the Server, I get the same message on the ASA5510: "IKE Initiator unable to find policy: Intfc inside, Src: 192.0.99.1, Dst: 192.16.99.1".I attach the configuration on the ASA5510.
I have a dynamic VPN site to site between ASA 5510 vs C880 with segment 172.23.191.0/25 for ASA side and some host in C880 side (e.g. 128.1.100.211, 128.1.115.181, 128.1.104.212) . The VPN is up, but only have communication with a host (128.1.115.181).
In the logs appears the next message when I try communication for all aother IP in the policy map configuration: IKE Initioator unable to find policy: Intf Inside, Src: 172.23.191.87, Dst: 128.1.115.182..ONLY WHEN I PINGING FROM SOME HOST IN C880 SIDE (e.g. 128.1.100.211) the communication is successfull.
What happen with this VPN, because I need to pinging from C880 IP host to ASA segment for establish communication?
Unfortunately, it does not appear as if the SRP500 series will allow you to create an ipsec policy where the local or remote traffic selection is 0.0.0.0/0.0.0.0. It wants a specific network. I have a scenario where I want to send all traffic over the vpn tunnel.
Is there a workaround to this or a special way to input "ANY" as the remote network?
Recently we have purchased a few SRP541W for our small branch office VPN sites. While working with the config I have discoved that when trying to create a IPSec VPN policy, I am limited to only one "remote network" entry. This is typically not how VPN tunnels are bulit. We generally put the following remote networks in the tunnel. How do I open a BUG ticket with Cisco and ask that they change the code?
I have configured ASA 5510 With IPsec Remote VPN.With local database users(Users are created in ASA).
Internal network has 4 VLANS. Need solution for below.
There are 25 Users created in ASA. where only 5 tp 6 users wants to grant access to Particualr IP and Subnets and rest of the users can access entire lan.
Is it possible to configure Group policy in ASA for IPsec Remote VPN.
I am trying to create a VPN between an SRP547W and a Cisco IOS router, in this case a UC540.I am running firmware 1.2.4 (003) Jan 11 2012. Now I can do this with an SRP527W and many other routers successfully. Including other IOS routers 1801, 1941 etc.
The issue I have is on the SRP547W I cannot create more than one IPSec Policy through a single IKE policy. I require this to route multiple v lans to our remote site. When I try to add an additional IPSec Policy I am give the error "IKE policy has been used by other IPSec policy"
This is possible to do on the SRP527W with latest firmware. I have tried rolling back to earlier firmware but instead I am given an error about overlap. Latest release note for this firmware suggest this issue was already resolved.
I am using the "File exist"-check in my Dynamic Access Policies to be sure that VPN-computers are corporate. I would like to place the file in each users %APPDATA%-directory, but it seem that the ASA cannot use variables when specifying the path? Is there a way to do this or do I have to use a absolute path in the check?I am running a ASA 5520 with sw 8.4(1).
I am new to v5.3, and I am not good at VPN.I just have my consultant to configure this correctly just today. Currently, there is only one rule for the access policy (Single Result Selection). That rule is to use Active Directory as the source for the authentication. And by default will deny any other access which is not found in the rule.Now... I just got an order that I need to setup a new user who will need to access to our network by using Cisco IPSec VPN (the software one). But that user is not setup in our Active Directory, and we do not want him to access our domain anyway. He only needs to access non-domain resourse...such as airconditioning controller by IP. So I am thinking to setup his account by using "internal identtity". If I do this way, what do I need to do to setup another access policy? May you give me some steps with little more details? OR... if it is not the way I should do...what else can I do to achieve this goal? Also, he said he could provide his static IP trying to access from. I have a ASA 5520.
I recently upgraded the ios image and the asdm on a cisco 5520 firewall. I use a policy on a cisco security manager to push policys out to this firewall. But it cant push to them now because the image has changed on the device.Is their anyway to re - assign the policy without having to do a new discovery.
we have a nat exemption rule for 10.0.0.0/8 to w.x.y.z followed by some static nat rules and then dynamic policy nat rule for 10.0.0.0/8 to w.x.y.z natting to IP a.b.c.d.When I do a packet trace from 10.10.10.10 to w.x.y.z, it shows the packet first matching against the nat exemption rule, and then immediately afterwards it matches the dynamic policy NAT rule. The static nat rules are being successfully bypassed (which is what I want), but why does the dynamic policy nat rule apply if an exempt rule has been hit already? An actual test between the IPs above reflects the result of the packet tracer as well (IP a.b.c.d is seen on server w.x.y.z).We are running the following software on an ASA5520.
I have configured the primary firewall every thing seem to be fine, And we have configured fail over device while config is getting replicated to the fail over device we are getting below error.
ERROR: Cannot add policy to rule engine ERROR: Unable to assign access-list LAN_out to interface inside
IOS and Model are same.But all the config got replicated from primary to secondary but except the one access group command.
ASA 5520 can handle 2 ISP? not to load balance or not standby/active but to use the 2 ISP at the same time and separately. for example, ISP_A who has 10m will be dedicated to the customer A/VLAN A, then ISP_B who has 4m will be for the rest of the customer's traffic. Can the ASA 5520 do traffic shaping or policy map just like in a normal router?
i have removed the icmp inspection from my default policy-map in my ASA 5520,now i could not able to ping to 4.2.2.2 from my LAN even though i have configured an ICMP Access-list in my asa like ,but I can't ping 4.2.2.2 for testing the Internet connectivity,what shall i do to allow only my self as admin to ping outside?
Currently running a pair of 5520 as VPN routers. running 8.0.3, been using only Anyconnect SSL VPN for end users. These boxes do nothing else except serve VPN clients.However, recently we tried testing some IPSEC clients and are realizing that the Anyconnect SSL VPN clients is about 10x slower than the IPSEC client.From my house, downloading either CIFS or FTP, I can pull pretty close to 1.0mbps, while using Anyconnect, I pull 0.1mbps. What could be causing this slowdown? Should SSL VPN performance be on par with IPSEC? Clients all are windows 7, 64 bit. and the testing is being conducted on the same device.
The network design is a hub and spoke using a carrier provided MPLS network with a ASA 5520 at the hub that has a IPSec tunnel to another part of the company.This configuration has worked for sometime now (long before I came to the company a couple of months ago).The thing that does not make sense to me is that the those networks out on the spokes did not have a route to the inside interface network of the ASA. With the way this MPLS works, if a network is not in the MPLS network routing tables it will not pass that network. The network was not in the MPLS network, nor was it in any of our edge routers connecting to the MPLS.
These hub networks did have routes both in the MPLS and edge devices for the networks on the other side of the IPSec tunnel and have been reaching them for some time.So what I am trying to understand is how it is possible for these hosts that have no route to the ASA inside interface network, but do have routes to the remote networks, how are they able to successfully pass that traffic? There are no NAT devices between these WAN hosts and the ASA.
I have a client that uses the ASA 5520 as both a firewall and VPN termination device. Day to day VPN usage is 30-50 users and the memory (512 MB) is typically at 50% while the CPU is mostly under 30%. I've suggested the RAM be upgrade to 1GB.The client would like to add a large block of VPN users which could see 250-300 concurrent users. What kind of a system resource hit should the expect with this level of load?
Class and Policy maps are defined properly but when I am going to apply the policy-map on interface ,throwing an error as "'set' command is not supported in a 2nd level policymap".
Class/Policy map configuration given below ....
class-map match-any cm_traffic_control match access-group name acl_traffic_control class-map match-any BE match access-group name be [Code] ....
I have made the following change to my ASA 5520 using ASDM to try and force VPN clients to use a self assigned certificate from the ASA. I made the following changes Remove Access VPN > Certificate Management > Identity Certificates > Add Certificate.Then I made the following change.. Remote Access VPN > Network (Client) Access > IPSec(IKEv1) Connection Profiles > Connection Profile > Edit > IKE Peer Authentication > Pre Shared key and pointed the identity certificate to the one I created in the step above.Having made this change I am still able to VPN without a certificate configured in authentication settings.I was expecting that the VPN would attempt to issue the self assigned cert to client machine?
Options a user may reside in Austin, TX and I want the user to utilize the local proxy (i.e. texasproxy:8080). We currently only require the user to enter the RSA passcode and username to authentication (RSA/AD username are identical). Is there a way to have the user authenticate via RSA and have the user's AD group membership (TX) assign the user the specific IE proxy settings? We are utilizing an ASA 5520 on 8.2, but we are willing to upgrade to newer IOS or even consider anyconnect to resolve this issue.
Currently we are having a 2 ISP for Internet. Need to achieve redundancy for IPSEC VPN using the domain.
Requirement :Will configure a domain and assign two public IP address from 2 service providers. Will set the priority for the public ip address and do the manual change during the ISP failure.We will provide the domain name to the clients to setup the IPSEC VPN.So incase of failure by one ISP, we will change the priority in the domain to point to the availble address.So that we can reduce the downtime and no need of configuring new IPSEC VPN tunnels.
Question :Whether we can achieve this in Cisco ASA 5520.Or do we have an alternate solution to overceome this solution.
When I try to add CAS to CAM a cannot choose a OOB Virtual Gateway or OOB Real-IP Gateway, because these operation modes are absent in Type list.What can be reason it?
Here is the situation: A CISCO871 router is configured to establish an IP SEC tunnel with a CISCO ASA5520. The configuration is OK about that. I wish to configure the same CISCO871 in order to establish a LAN-to-LAN IP sec Tunnel with another CISCO871 at the same time in order to reach private network. So, I have followed the Cisco procedure Document ID: 71462 "LAN-to-LAN IP sec Tunnel Between Two Routers Configuration Example"; it works, I can reach the peer private network BUT ONLY when the IP SEC tunnel with ASA is not established.
It seems to be a routing problem...I don't find how to configure to make both tunnels up and functional at the same time.
i have a Layer3 Switch Cisco WS-c3750G -24T , initially i have a IOS version c3750-Ipbase , recentely i have upgraded my IOS to c3750-Ipservices-M to enable to PBR for my network , i have created all the acl and tried to give the route-map with PBR , the command was initiallying but i am not able to see the applied route-map in my policy route , i have gone through the blog and enabled SDM prefer routing , but no luck .
I'm unable to apply a policing limit in a switchport of the CISCO861 router. This is my configuration:interface FastEthernet0, service-policy input wired-input,service-policy output wired-output end.
I have two ASA 5520 units, both running version 8.3(2) code. Among many other uses, they have an IPSec tunnel between them to link office 1 and office 3 together. Office 2 does exist, and is connected to a different port on the ASA in office 3; there is no IPSec involved with office 3.
I have set up a remote access ipsec vpn on an asa 5520. I can connect, and ping internal ip addresses, however I cannot ping back out to the internet, and dns resolution does not work.
I am trying to set up remote access vpn on an asa 5520 running 8.4.1. I have the ipsec group, policies, and ip pool set up. When I try and connect with the cisco vpn client I see the following in the logs. Deny icmp src outside:214.67.39.42 dst outside:24.252.51.73 (type 3, code 3) by access-group "acl_inbound". Do I need to put in some firewall rules to allow this traffice so that the VPN can connect?
I am currently having some problems on our 5520 ASAs. The problem is the IPSec VPN clients not being able to connect. We have had an issue twice this week where this happened. Earlier in the week we had folks not able to sign in, but some folks who were connected already stayed connected. The ASAs had been up for 200+ days and no changes have been made to it recently. At that point I had to reload the ASAs so users could start signing back in to it. Today we had a similar issue, but I didn’t have to reload the ASAs. The issue‘resolved’ itself. The VPN clients are getting Error code: 433 and the ASAs are getting Reason: Peer Address Changed when this occurs.
ASA5520, 2048 MB RAM, CPU Pentium 4 Celeron 2000 MHz version 8.3.2.
