Cisco VPN :: Traffic Is Not Passing On Plain IPSec Tunnel Between Two 892s
Dec 14, 2011
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]
View 5 Replies
ADVERTISEMENT
Nov 17, 2011
I have set a tunnel between Cisco pix 6.3 and Cisco Router 7200. Show Isakmp sa showing below detail on Pix
Total : 1
Embryonic : 0
dst src state pending created
xx6.x71.x29.x68 x2.1x7.52.1x1 QM_IDLE 0 0
Is tunnel is UP ? Traffice is not going throgh the tunnel . why ?
View 1 Replies
View Related
Jan 15, 2012
I have a site to site tunnel between two 5520 ASAs. Tunnel is up but when I try to talk to the other side, the implicit deny on the inside interface of the local ASA blocks the traffic. When I ping, the tunnel comes up but in the logs it says it is blocking icmp from inside to outside. I have tried the sys opt connection permit-vpn but it is not working. The traffic is from 5 specific machines within the local sub net that I put in a network object group called Celerra_Replication.
I want to them to be able to talk to 5 machines on the far end of the tunnel in a seperate sub net. They are in a net wrok object group called GP_Celerra_Replication The ACLs I created for this appear to be created correctly allowing IP from Celerra_replication to GP_Celerra_Replication and the opposite on the other side.
View 1 Replies
View Related
Aug 4, 2011
I have created an L2L tunnel between my self and a 3rd party. I am using a Cisco ASA 5520 and the other end is using a Cisco 3005 VPN concentrator. The tunnel will get established and pass traffic both ways for a little while, it varies, sometimes 1 hour or last time we built it it was working for 17 hours, but at some point my ASA will stop transmitting but it will still be receiving packets. These errors start to show up when I look at the traffic going through my ASA interfaces:
713042 IKE Initiator unable to find policy: Intf Outside, Src: 192.168.xx.16, Dst: 10.1.xx.30
Then when I try to ping their hosts .30 and .27 I get:
713041 Group = 68.23.xx.xx, IP = 68.23.xx.xx, IKE Initiator: New Phase 2, Intf private, IKE Peer 68.23.xx.xx local Proxy Address 192.168.xx.16, remote Proxy Address 10.1.xx.30, Crypto map (Outside_map)
713041 Group = 68.23.xx.xx, IP = 68.23.xx.xx, IKE Initiator: New Phase 2, Intf private, IKE Peer 68.23.xx.xx local Proxy Address 192.168.xx.16, remote Proxy Address 10.1.xx.27, Crypto map (Outside_map)
713050 Group = 68.23.xx.xx, IP = 68.23.xx.xx, Connection terminated for peer 68.23.xx.xx. Reason: Peer Terminate Remote Proxy 10.1.xx.27, Local Proxy 192.168.xx.16
When I first configured this tunnel it was with 3DES and SHA for phase 1 & 2, but when the tunnel would come up my phase 1 would negotiate to an MD5 hash, even though I specifically entered SHA, so me and the 3rd party decided to bring all the hashes for phase 1 & 2 down to MD5, and that was when it was up for the longest, but the problem still came back eventually. My ASA config posted below:
ASA Version 8.2(3)
name 192.168.xx.16 Server description Server
name 10.1.xx.27 XYZ_01
name 10.1.xx.28 XYZ_02
name 10.1.xx.29 XYZ_03
[code].....
View 1 Replies
View Related
Dec 15, 2011
I have a VPN tunnel between two 892s. When either ISAKMP or IPSec SA lifetime expires tunnel stops processing traffic. However nothing is logged in the syslog. But when I enable debug crypto isakmp error and debug crypto ipsec error following entries appear:
ISAKMP:(0):Can't decrement IKE Call Admission Control stat outgoing_active since it's already 0
ISAKMP:(2041):R-U-THERE-ACK sequence number 0x63D809BB does not correspond to expected value 0x63D809BC
%CRYPTO-4-RECVD_PKT_INV_SPI: decaps: rec'd IPSEC packet has invalid spi for destaddr=XX.XX.XX.XX, prot=50, spi=0x3560099E(895486366), srcaddr=YY.YY.YY.YY, input interface=GigabitEthernet0
ISAKMP:(2043): IPSec policy invalidated proposal with error 4
Is this a bug? IOS is Cisco IOS Software, C890 Software (C890-UNIVERSALK9-M), Version 15.1(2)T2, RELEASE SOFTWARE (fc1)
View 2 Replies
View Related
Apr 3, 2013
I do have a 5505 up and running, and passing data... url...Now I am trying to get a IPSEC VPN tunnel working.I actually have it up (IKE phase 1 & 2 both passed), but it is not sending/receiving data through the tunnel.
The networks concerned: name 10.0.0.0 Eventual (HQ Site behind Firewall)name 1.1.1.0 CFS (Public Network Gateway for Palo Alto Firewall - Firewall IP: 1.1.1.1)name 2.2.2.0 T1 (Remote site - Outside interface of 5505: 2.2.2.2)name 10.209.0.0 Local (Remote Network - internal interface of 5505: 10.20 9. 0.3) On a ping to the HQ network from behind the ASA, I get port map translation creation failed for icmp src inside:10.209.0.9 dst inside:10.0.0.33 (type 8, code 0)
I am suspecting that there is a NAT error and/or a lack of a static route for the rest of the 10.0.0.0 traffic, and that I may have to exempt/route the traffic for the HQ network (10.0.0.0), but I haven't been able to get the correct entries to make it work. [code]
View 22 Replies
View Related
Aug 8, 2012
i 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
View 7 Replies
View Related
Jun 29, 2011
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 Related
Mar 19, 2011
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).
View 1 Replies
View Related
Jan 30, 2012
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.
View 21 Replies
View Related
Oct 23, 2012
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.
View 7 Replies
View Related
Jul 18, 2011
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.
View 7 Replies
View Related
Feb 24, 2011
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 Related
Mar 7, 2013
I 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]....
View 3 Replies
View Related
Feb 6, 2012
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].....
View 4 Replies
View Related
Jan 2, 2013
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.
View 10 Replies
View Related
Apr 7, 2012
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,...
View 15 Replies
View Related
May 31, 2012
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.
View 2 Replies
View Related
Sep 23, 2012
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 Related
Apr 30, 2011
I've looked at many others having this same problem, but can't seem to figure out what my problem is. Same issue as most, I can connect fine, I get an IP, but it won't pass any traffic, I can't ping anything or access anything.
View 8 Replies
View Related
Oct 17, 2012
I 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].....
View 3 Replies
View Related
Sep 21, 2012
I have a vendor that currently uses a Cisco 871 as a VPN router in our company network, they use it connect to provide services to one of the servers in our LAN for our customers. Recently, we are going to be setting up a 24/7 call center with this vendor, they will be accessing a server in our network through the VPN to provide customer service during after hour periods.We have a problem however, with an application that is hosted by another vendor that is critical for our regular company call center. Access is reached with this application through this vendor by way of IPSec VPN tunnel that is built in our company's Cisco ASA 5510. This application is accessed via Internet Explorer that goes across to access the application at the endpoint
I need to figure a way by which the vendor that will be running the 24/7 call center coming through their tunnel in our network to connect over to the tunnel on the vendor on my ASA. Im likely going to have to set some routing of traffic in my internal default gateway router for this to work.
View 2 Replies
View Related
Sep 7, 2011
I've got a client that recently got an ASA 5505. E0/0 is connected to the outside, E0/1 connected to the internal server (Win 2008). The ASA "local network" is 172.30.1.0/24; my internal network is 192.168.1.0/24. I'm able to connect from home through AnyConnect and get a proper address (which I've got a pool of 172.30.1.64/26 assigned for VPN users), but no traffic from my computer will go to the internal network, nor will the internal server (or the ASA for that matter) can't talk to my VPN'd computer.
On the firewall settings on the ASA, I've got it all open: any/any on both inside and outside, just to try and get anything to go through. I've even got split-tunneling working, but not traffic-passing! The config is below (redacting local AAA users).
[Code] .....
View 9 Replies
View Related
Jan 26, 2011
Traffic Generator TG connected to R1 via switch SW . One end of the R1 is LAN1 interface and other end is WAN1. LAN1 is connected to switch SW. WAN1 is connected to R2 WAN0 interface..
TG ------------- SW ------------------------------(LAN1) Router R1 (WAN1)------------------------------(WAN0)Router R2
I have to pass traffic to R2 WAN0 interface.
Wen I pass traffic say 5000 from TG, I'm to recieve 5000 at R1 lan1 interface but I'm not to recieve at R2 WAN1 interface and hence not to R2 WAN0 interface.
Config at TG:'
-----------------
Destination IP : R2 WAN interfavce IP
Destination MAC : R1 LAN mac
View 1 Replies
View Related
May 2, 2012
I am about to pull my hair out. I have a 1841 router at one end with 3 ASA's for teleworkers working great. I'm connecting a 4th one that I can not get to work for the life of me. The tunnel is comming up, but its not passing any traffic. I don't see any glaring errors in the VPN debug. The router comes up, reverse route injection does its thing... all looks great. Am I totally overlooking somthing? I must have rebuilt this a dozen times.
: ASA Version 8.2(1) !hostname ciscoasa104domain-name default.domain.invalidnames!interface Vlan1nameif insidesecurity-level 100ip address 192.168.104.1 255.255.255.0!interface Vlan2nameif outsidesecurity-level 0ip address dhcp setroute! interface Ethernet0/0switchport access vlan 2!interface Ethernet0/1!interface Ethernet0/2!interface Ethernet0/3!interface Ethernet0/4!interface Ethernet0/5!interface Ethernet0/6!interface Ethernet0/7!boot system disk0:/asa821-k8.binftp mode passivedns server-group DefaultDNSdomain-name default.domain.invalidsame-security-traffic permit inter-interfacesame-security-traffic permit intra-interfaceobject-group network DM_INLINE_NETWORK_1network-object 192.168.2.0 255.255.255.0network-object 192.168.4.0 255.255.255.0access-list outside_1_cryptomap extended permit ip 192.168.104.0 255.255.255.0
[code]....
View 7 Replies
View Related
Jan 17, 2011
I have an Cisco ME3400-24TS-A Switch with is not behaving normal.
I have already erased its flash, uploaded new IOS but could not fix the issue. However it boots normally and pass all tests show in boot process. Issue is this the i cant access or ping the computers attached to its ports from one to other.
However i can ping the switch vlan 1 IP from all computers attached to it.
When i tried Debug All Command, its shows the following:
debug all
This may severely impact network performance. Continue? (yes/[no]): yes
All possible debugging has been turned on
Switch#
*Mar 1 00:03:41.467: special_oce_change_vectors: select debug vectors
[Code]....
View 2 Replies
View Related
Apr 18, 2012
i am using RV042 router, i have configured DMZ in this, DMZ is not passing the traffic, i am able to ping the DMZ ip from the server. but the server is not getting the Internet.
View 1 Replies
View Related
Jan 15, 2013
I am facing a very big problem with site to site vpn on cisco 2900 ios.
I configured the vpn and when i ping from router itself to destination ip with source as lan interface , VPN works, no problem.
but when i connect any computer directly to router's lan interface to initiate traffic , it doesnot work at all. and on computer's lan i see yeloow sign.
mtu is 1500, speed is auto (I tried changing also) , duplex is auto ( i tried changing also) , through firewall on pc should not affect but still i disabled it.
since their is no problem with vpn config as vpn comes up when i initiate ping from router itself but i dont know why it is not working from lan.
do we need any inspect icmp on this router also ? or any policy modification to pass traffic across the interfac on router is required ?
I was useinf c2900k9-15.0(M4).bin and i upgraded it to 15.3 which is lated to get reed of any bug .
I connected two laptops directly to router's gi0/0, g0/1 interface to ping from one laptop to another but this also did not work.
View 3 Replies
View Related
Jan 24, 2012
I have a server with SQL Server 2008 on it. It listens on the default ports 1433 & 1434. But traffic is not making it through my DIR-655 to the LAN so that SQL Server can respond to the request. I am using DynDNS and have confirmed that the traffic is getting thru DNS and finding the router, but after watching the syslog I can see that I'm getting multiple of the following error messages when a request is initiated from a client (Microsoft Access app) outside my network:
01-24-2012 22:28:24 System3.Info 192.168.1.1 Tue Jan 24 22:28:28 2012 D-Link Systems DIR-655 System Log: Blocked incoming TCP connection request from 67.167.87.109:53284 to 67.167.87.109:139 01-24-2012 22:28:24 System3.Info 192.168.1.1 Tue Jan 24 22:28:28 2012 D-Link Systems DIR-655 System Log: Blocked incoming TCP connection request from 67.167.87.109:53282 to 67.167.87.109:445
In Port Forwarding I have specified a rule to allow/pass port 1433 & 1434 TCP traffic to my internal server IP.
Also I'm confused by the ports shown above since I was expecting to see 1433/1434 in there...seems this is a factor in the traffic never getting to the SQL Server to process the request?
View 1 Replies
View Related
Dec 20, 2011
FTP traffic routed from outside to the inside interface works fine. I have another interface with multiple sub-interfaces and vlans configured. FTP traffic routed from the outside to vlan2_servers is not making it through the firewall. I must be missing something. I have attached my config.
View 4 Replies
View Related
Feb 12, 2012
We have a managed service provider voip network that requires us to use our own router for the data network. We wanted to use the RV042 for it's easy vpn setup. After installing it worked great for about 10 min. then the WAN port stopped passing traffic. 3 min. later it started working again. We tested the RV042 on a different network and it works fine. We tested an older Pix on the managed network and that works fine. But the RV042 will not work on the managed service provider voip network. The service provider says that on their end it shows our WAN port going up and down.
View 1 Replies
View Related
Jun 15, 2011
We are trying to get a video conference system (POLYCOM) up running. Thrue a Cisco 1812 router with Firewall feature set.
I Have heard in the past that there should be issues with Polycom and Cisco, but have actually never seen it.I can establish a video call from inside the 1812 to outside.
But when I try from outside to the public ip adress there is nattet to, then it reach the video system and die straight after, so there is never any video session set up.
I have tried to remove everything regarding firewall feature and passing true, so the only thing the 1812 should do is NAT. And still the same.
I can not see anything in the log on the router from the ACL's where I permittet everything, other then it connect on the port TCP 1720, as it should. This is the software I'm running on the router:
Cisco IOS Software, C181X Software (C181X-ADVIPSERVICESK9-M), Version 12.4(15)T3, RELEASE SOFTWARE (fc1)
When I search Google, it look like there is a lot issues with Cisco and Polycom, but I have not found any concret solution. Other then I should use a ADSL line with a public IP address. As we probably is going to do.
View 6 Replies
View Related
Sep 23, 2011
We have a 2911 Router running 15.0(1)M4. G 0/0 is our LAN interface, and it has three subinterfacesG0/0.1 is our data LAN, and the gateway for our Windows machines. This is the interface this question concerns.G0/0.23 is a separate LAN for various equipmentG0/0.192 is another LAN for equipmentG 0/1 is connected to the internet, and has a public address.S 0/0/0 is a T1 PPP, connected to our core data centerS 0/1/0 is a backup T1 PPP, again, connected to our core data center.There are three static routes entered:ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 10.12.1.1 100 This is the first PPPip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 10.13.1.1 200 This is the secondary PPPip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx 255 It currently has a cost of 255 while i figure this one out. xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx represents the cable company gateway, which I can ping properly. I've also used "gigabitethernet 0/1" in place of the next hop ip with the same results. The public interface is properly connected, and can ping it's next hop (the cable company gateway). When I change the static route for gigabitethernet 0/1 to a cost of "0", the router can properly ping DNS names, such as google.com through the public interface.
However, devices on the data LAN cannot reach any public addresses except for the router's public interface, let alone DNS names (I am using 8.8.8.8 as my test IP). If I revert the cost back to 255, making the PPP the gateway of last resort, these devices can again connect. (they travel through the PPP to our Data center's internet)
This confuses me. If our server, on the same LAN as the router can ping the public interface (it's definitley not leaving the 2911, as latency is less than 1ms), and the router itself can ping outside addresses, what is preventing the router's public interface from passing traffic to the internet from any source other than itself? I have attached our running config in the hopes that there is something obvious I'm missing (the public ip addresses have been changed so they are not exposed). I simply want clients on our 10.23.0.0 LAN to get to the internet via the public interface of the local router, and still connect to corporate resources using the PPP links. MAS_2911#sho run
Building configuration...
Current configuration : 5666 bytes
!
! Last configuration change at 01:47:50 eastern Sat Sep 24 2011 by redacted
[Code].....
View 6 Replies
View Related
