Cisco VPN :: Setting Up IPsec For DMVPN Between 2811 And 2951s In Test Lab?
Aug 30, 2011
setting up IPsec for a DMVPN between a 2811 and 2951s in a test lab. I have enabled IPsec on the hub (2811) but I am unable to do so on either of the 2951s. After researching, it seems that I may have the incorrect IOS for this, but I am at a loss which IOS I should be using. Currently the 2951s are on "c2951-universalk9-mz.SPA.151-2.T2.bin" and the only crypto options are(config)#crypto ?
ca Certification authority
key Long term key operations
pki Public Key components
while on the 2811 I get:
WIN-T(config)#crypto ?
ca Certification authority
call Configure Crypto Call Admission Control
ctcp Configure cTCP encapsulation
dynamic-map Specify a dynamic crypto map template
engine Enter a crypto engine configurable menu
gdoi Configure GDOI policy
[code]...
These are all hand me downs?
View 2 Replies
ADVERTISEMENT
Nov 15, 2011
I configured a 2811 series router for dmvpn. My two tunnels are up but one of the tunnel is flapping with this message.
View 4 Replies
View Related
Nov 20, 2010
I´m trying to config a wccp web-proxy in a ISR 2811 at branch network. I have an Iron Port at Head-Quarter.
The idea is that the users at branch network, transparently forward http traffic to Iron Port at Central-Office and from them go to Internet.
The communication between sites is over DMVPN. I have two GRE tunnels running OSPF.
The Iron Port is configured as wccp v2 transparent redirection with forwarding method L2 or GRE an retunr method as L2 or GRE.
I receive packets on the branch router "Here I Am" but it get a message on debug:
Nov 21 19:26:07.067 GMT-2: WCCP-EVNT:D10: Here_I_Am packet from 172.16.10.10 w/bad fwd method L2, received indirectly via Tunnel1Nov 21 19:26:07.067 GMT-2: WCCP-EVNT:D10: Here_I_Am packet from 172.16.10.10 with incompatible capabilites
Nov 21 19:46:07.035 GMT-2: WCCP-PKT:D10: Sending I_See_You packet to 172.16.10.10 w/ rcv_id 0000004F
View 1 Replies
View Related
May 15, 2013
We are facing network heavy and slow performance at one of our remote site, we are using Cisco2800 series router with same IOS on either of the sites.Our WAN network is running on BGP with EIGRP configured and tunnels were configured on either of the sites. As part of the testing I have removed the tunnel to see the performance was ok from Head office to remote branch and the WAN network is getting heavy and slow down when we put the tunnel back in hub and spoke.
quick info
Cisco 2800 Series router
IOS: (C2800NM-ADVIPSERVICESK9-M), Version 12.4(15)T1, RELEASE SOFTWARE
View 1 Replies
View Related
Feb 8, 2011
We have about 200 spokes (2811 routers), each one connected to two hubs(7206VXR with NPE-G2) via a separate DMVPN. DMVPN is over MPLS cloud provided by the local operator. On the hubs we get very frequently these type of messages
.Feb 9 16:00:10.402: %DUAL-5-NBRCHANGE: IP-EIGRP(0) 200: Neighbor 10.X.X.X (Tunnel3) is down: Interface Goodbye received.Feb 9 16:00:11.658: %DUAL-5-NBRCHANGE: IP-EIGRP(0) 200: Neighbor 10.X.X.X (Tunnel3) is up: new adjacency
On the spoke
Feb 9 13:36:48: %DUAL-5-NBRCHANGE: IP-EIGRP(0) 200: Neighbor 10.X.X.X (Tunnel0) is down: holding time expiredFeb 9 13:36:51: %DUAL-5-NBRCHANGE: IP-EIGRP(0) 200: Neighbor 10.X.X.X (Tunnel0) is up: new adjacency
I think the default eigrp hello and holding timers (5,15) are not suitable since these are wan links.
View 1 Replies
View Related
Apr 16, 2011
We have 7606 router without any ipsec module on it,so i check the ios and it has all commands in interface tunnel for configuring the dmvpn multipoint tunnel and also protection profile for ipsec! so i have this question: do we can run dmvpn between this router and our wan routers wich are 3845.
View 2 Replies
View Related
Feb 2, 2011
I am exploring the possibility of having Cisco 1841's (or higher) at multiple sites. Each router will support 2 x ADSL connections (HWIC-1ADSL cards). My plan is to set up a DMVPN Full Mesh Tunnel on the first ADSL interface on each router and have RIP route these subnets, this will be for my Voice traffic only.
Further more I would like to set up a second IPSEC VPN tunnel between the head site and all other sites (the sites do not require direct communication for data purposes). This will route via static/weighted routes.
Any similar set up or sample configurations?
whether or not you can also run parallel DMVPN full mesh tunnels on a Cisco 1841 as this would be the other option.
the only restrictions are that the ADSL links cannot be upgraded to SHDSL etc.
View 3 Replies
View Related
Feb 26, 2012
what's the meaning of the output:
Interface Speed Local pair Pair length Remote pair Pair status
--------- ----- ---------- ------------------ ----------- --------------------
Gi0/40 100M Pair A 2 +/- 4 meters Pair A Normal
Pair B 2 +/- 4 meters Pair B Normal
Pair C 2 +/- 4 meters Pair C Short
Pair D 2 +/- 4 meters Pair D Short
From the command
test cable-diagnostics tdr int gi 0/40
It's normal?If not, then. the problem is on the cable or on one of the interfaces?The interface is connected between a fastethenert on a 2811 router and a 3560-48 switch.The cable is a straight through cat 5e cable. (I have changed several cables with same result).
View 4 Replies
View Related
Mar 25, 2013
I am trying to establish a site-to-site VPN between two Cisco routers (2951s). I am using the below config on both routers. One router has an interface with a public IP assigned to it, the other uses a private IP and is natted by our ASA outbound.
If i remove the tunnel protection ipsec profile command from the tunnel interface, the tunnel comes up no problem and I can ping both ends of the tunnel. But as soon as I apply the tunnel protection on the tunnel interface, it dies. Both sides of the tunnel show up but no pings are allowed and I see in the debugs that for some reason the routers don't think the Pre-Shared keys are configured properly. I have gone as far as making the ISAKMP keys very simple and I know there is something I'm missing here.
On the ASA i'm allowing ESP (protocol 50) and ISAKMP (UDP 500) both directions (in and out of the firewall). I am also allowing UDP NAT-T (4500) just in case. I don't see anything on the firewall being blocked but I can't be certain that isn't causing the problem. What could I be missing here?
*****Router Config*****
crypto isakmp policy 10
encr aes 256
authentication pre-share
group 5
lifetime 1800
crypto isakmp key cisco123 address PUBLICIPHERE
[code]....
View 3 Replies
View Related
Jan 23, 2011
We have a remote office that needs to be connected to the central office through a site to site ipsec VPN.At the central site there is a 2811, and at the remote site there is 1841.Most of the traffic will be VoIP traffic and small amounts of data.
I need to setup some QoS that would firstly prefer the VPN traffic over internet access and then inside the VPN I need some QoS that will preffer VoIP over data.
View 1 Replies
View Related
Jul 25, 2011
I am having problems with CPU load on 2811 with AIM-VPN-II. There is a GRE+IPSec over E3 WAN link and the authentication is done using RSA, but even that there is around 10Mb/s of traffic I have a 70 - 85%. I also have another WAN link with router 2811 that doesn't have a AIM-VPN, and that one reach 95% CPU once the traffic goes up to 5 Mb/s.
crypto isakmp policy 10
encr aes
authentication rsa-encr
[Code]....
Are there any recommendations that RSA authentication is not supportted for hardward encryption? It worries me, becouse have more sitautions like this.
View 3 Replies
View Related
Oct 27, 2011
I have a 2811 that is my HQ router with a 10MB pipe. I was trying to configure a IPSEC tunnel to connect to my ASA that has access to our companies internal servers on the 10.33. and 172.16.31 network. I am having a problem getting phase 1 to even come up. I've looked over the configurations and unless i'm overlooking something I dont see what could be keeping it from at least completing phase 1
Below are the configs.
2811-CFG
crypto isakmp policy 10
encr 3des
hash md5
[Code] ....
View 6 Replies
View Related
Dec 12, 2011
I am trying to get a 2811 to accept two IPSec peers however can only get one working at a time. I have setup fa0/0 and fa0/1 with their own public facing IP addresses with crypto maps associated to each interface however can only establish connectivity to one interface at any one time.
Relevent configuration below:
crypto isakmp policy 2
encr 3des
hash md5
authentication pre-share
group 2
lifetime 28800
[code]....
View 1 Replies
View Related
Feb 13, 2013
I am attempting to setup remote VPN access for clients but have been unable to connect remotely using Cisco VPN client. Here is the current configuration on the router. I think I'm almost there and may be missing a couple commands.
Current configuration : 4758 bytes
!
version 12.4
service timestamps debug datetime msec
service timestamps log datetime msec
service password-encryption
!
hostname FCC-1811-Router
[code].....
View 3 Replies
View Related
Feb 22, 2011
I am trying to setup a L2L IPSec VPN between cisco VPN3020 concentrator and Cisco 2811 something is not working and I don't understand why.I describe my situation in detail my router has 2 interfaces
External interface Fa 0/1 ip 193.P.Q.R
Internal interface Fa 0/0 141.G.H.254
Lan on internal interface is 141.G.H.0/24
remote VPN concentrator has 2 interfaces
Public interface 131.A.B.C
Private interface 131.A.I.E
I have to set up L2L so that host 141.G.H.10 can talk to host 131.A.H.D whici is behind the VPN concentrator my router config:
crypto isakmp policy 3 encr 3des hash md5 authentication pre-share group 2crypto isakmp key * address 131.A.B.C!crypto ipsec transform-set presid-set esp-3des esp-md5-hmac !crypto map presid-map 5 ipsec-isakmp set peer 131.A.B.C set transform-set presid-set match address presid!interface FastEthernet0/1 ip address 193.P.Q.R 255.255.255.252 duplex full speed 100 crypto map presid-map!interface FastEthernet0/0 ip address 141.G.H.254 255.255.255.0 duplex auto speed auto!
ip access-list extended presid permit ip host 141.G.H.10 host 131.A.H.D
ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 193.P.Q.S
Then I configured VPN3020 accordingly creating a lan to lan profile with the proper IKE proposals ecc ecc when interesting traffic is matched by VPN acl (presid) I see this messages in the VPN concentrator logs:
57101 02/23/2011 15:49:05.310 SEV=4 IKE/119 RPT=4033 193.P.Q.R Group [193.P.Q.R]PHASE 1 COMPLETED 57102 02/23/2011 15:49:05.310 SEV=4 AUTH/22 RPT=3935 193.P.Q.R User [193.P.Q.R] Group [193.P.Q.R] connected, Session Type: IPSec/LAN-to-LAN 57104 02/23/2011 15:49:05.310 SEV=4 AUTH/84 RPT=11 LAN-to-LAN tunnel to headend device 193.P.Q.R connected 57110 02/23/2011 15:49:54.820 SEV=4 IKE/123 RPT=1093 193.P.Q.R Group [193.P.Q.R]IKE lost contact with remote peer, deleting connection (keepalive type: DPD) 57112 02/23/2011 15:49:54.820 SEV=5 IKE/194 RPT=3778 193.P.Q.R Group [193.P.Q.R]Sending IKE Delete With Reason message: Connectivity to Client Lost. 57114 02/23/2011 15:49:54.820 SEV=4 AUTH/23 RPT=14 193.P.Q.R User [193.P.Q.R] Group [193.P.Q.R] disconnected: duration: 0:00:49 57115 02/23/2011 15:49:54.820 SEV=4 AUTH/85 RPT=11 LAN-to-LAN tunnel to headend device 193.P.Q.R disconnected: duration: 0:00:49
and from router side I See this with show crypto isakmp sa
131.A.B.C 193.P.Q.R CONF_XAUTH 5 0 ACTIVE
but the status got stuck in CONF_XAUTH state and then disconnects?
View 1 Replies
View Related
Oct 27, 2012
I'm now trying to implement a IPsec VPN network over transport mode in my simple network environment.I got two Cisco 2811 routers connected each other and each router hosts a client PC running Windows7.
I have finished the configuration on both routers and make them running over transport mode.However, as what it should be, transport mode indicates the communication between two end stations (two PCs) the client PC (install or configure something) to make the network fully works?
View 4 Replies
View Related
Mar 3, 2011
We just moved to a new place and ISP here have a bit weried connection - they use cable modem that provides "local" IP (through DHCP) to the router and than you have to dial out L2TP to the ISP in order to connect to internet.This setup works fine with "home" routers, like the LinkSys, however I have no clue on how to setup it on 2811.
View 1 Replies
View Related
Jul 15, 2012
My router is Cisco 2811 with IOS version 12.4(22)T1. It had established IPSec with another peer (203.*.*.250 shown below) for long until recently we make it re-establish IPSec VPN with another peer (203.*.*.30 shown below). It showed that the new sa is active but the result still showed there were 4 deleted SAs. The 4 obsolete sa entries won't vanish no matter what I do i.e. reset the interface, re-create crypto map, clear all sa and etc.
From numerous testings we knew that the VPN doesn't work even the desired sa is there remaining active. I reckon it has something to do with those deleted sas ( i mean it is supposed to show only the last one if it is working fine ). I don't know how it would be come like this as we did pretty much the samething on other VPN routers with no problems.
View 20 Replies
View Related
Feb 7, 2012
I am a total new comer for Cisco Router. All I know is plug the console cable to a serial port on a PC, fire-up HyperTerminal to view and that's it. I don't know any command or scripts.
I am trying to setup my client connection, I already receive the required configuration settings from ISP. It is a Leased Line Serial connection.
How to setup the router with the below configuration.
Serial IP : 1.X.XX.222
Serial Netmask : 255.255.255.XXX
LAN IP : 1.X.XXX.1 to 1.X.XXX.31
LAN Netmask : 255.255.255.XXX
[Code] ....
View 5 Replies
View Related
Sep 5, 2012
We're starting to share video across our network and would like to setup multicast to conserve at least some of the bandwidth. We have a broad mix of equipment (A Catalyst 6509-E at the core, a combination for Cisco 2691 & 2811 routers, and a whole lot of Catalyst 3500, 3550, 3560 switches at a hundred locations. Where would I begin? Would I need to define routing for the multicast IP addresses (224.0.0.0)? Would I need to setup interfaces & IP networks where each multicast device is located like I would for a new IP subnet?
View 1 Replies
View Related
May 3, 2011
Question re: DIR-655; Hardware ver A4; Firmware version 1.32NA
During bandwidth tests to several sites (principally speedtest.net) I get ping times of 10-11 ms, download speeds of 12+ to 17+ mbps but failure on upload tests using my DIR-655.
When I bypass the 655 and test directly with my cable modem, all (including upload) tests work reliably and consistently.
I have swapped the two ethernet cables involved as well as replacing both with new cables but the results are the same (uploads fail with 655 and work without it)
I have seen several postings over the the last year with this same problem but have never seen any comment from D-Link, or a solution from any reader.
Not that it should have any bearing, but I have TA785GE-128M motherboard and am running Windows 7 (patch current) on COMCAST
is this problem acknowledged by D-Link and is there a solution?
View 14 Replies
View Related
Jun 27, 2011
To establish s secure tunnel using GRE with IPSec do I need to add a SPA-IPSEC module to my 7604 chassis?
View 1 Replies
View Related
Jun 23, 2011
Co-worker just got a Blackberry Playbook tablet and, try as I might, we cannot get the darn thing to successfully set up a working IPSEC/L2TP vpn tunnel to our ASA 5510, which acts as a multi-purpose VPN concentrator. Any luck setting up L2TP/IPSEC VPN to ASA from Blackberry Playbook?
View 0 Replies
View Related
Aug 26, 2012
We bought a RV220W in order to get a VPN in our Small Business. The RV220W will only be used to let clients connect to it and not a tunnel between another VPN box.We could use QuickVPN, but it won't be working in our case, because in order to use QuickVPN, the router wants to change its IP 10.x.y.1. Because we have multiple servers/services that are using a static IP, it would be quite painful to change the subnet. Therefore, we would like to stay on the same subnet and change it in worst case scenario only. This is why QuickVPN is not an option here.We could use SSL VPN, but most of our clients who will connect to the VPN are using Windows 7 x64. I have tried the Windows 7 x64 fix told in the latest firmware release notes, but I can't get it to work on my computer, which is a Win7 x64. It might still be broken. Many of them are not very tech-savyy, so I can't tell them to use a virtual machine to connect.We want a secure connection, therefore IPSec is better than PPTP. I've been trying to setup IPSec for the past hours but I can't get it working. At first, I wanted to use an SSL certificate, but having no luck with this, I switched to a Pre-shared Key (PSK) in order to get things simpler. Eventually I would like to use an SSL certificate, however I would like to get PSK working first to confirm that the IPSec connection is working.
I have attached with this post, screenshots of the IKE and VPN Policies. I have used the VPN Wizard in order to complete these fields. The local identifier is the WAN DynDNS FQDN. However, as for the remote FQDN, there should be none really, because clients are connecting to it, so the RV220W won't know in advance who's connecting and from where. I have read that when using the Responder type, the remote settings should not matter. Also, the PSK is 25 caracters long.After setting the RV220W up, I have set up a L2TP/IPSec VPN connection on my Windows 7. I have set up the connection to connect to the DynDNS address and set up the PSK in the Advanced settings. After I typed my IPSec username and password to connect (which was created in the IPSec users section), Windows tries to connect and times out :
Error 789 : The L2TP connection attempt failed because the security layer encountered a processing error during initial negotiations with the remote computer.
At the same time on the RV220W, this error shows up in the logs :
2012-08-26 23:45:24: [rv220w][IKE] ERROR: Could not find configuration for 24.54.xx.xx[500]
I can't figure out what I am doing wrong. I've read the Administration manual quite a few times and it seems that I have followed everything by the book.I have tried to enable/disable my Windows firewall, but did not get any luck. The RV220W is located at a remote office, to make sure that I can connect from the outside, before you think that I'm trying to connect to the outside, from the inside I have changed few settings in the IKE policy to try to make it work. Settings such as the Exchange Mode, because I've read that the Aggressive mode had issues. At this moment, the settings are back to default, once the wizard has been run. I'm thinking about setting a PPTP to confirm that this works, then move up to IPSec PSK, then to IPSec SSL Certificate.
View 1 Replies
View Related
Jan 19, 2013
I'm setting up a IPSec Tunnel between 3800 and 2600 routers over the internet.
Do I need to create a tunnel interface as they suggest in this document? [URL]
I just watched a couple of you tube videos saying I don't need to do that...
View 8 Replies
View Related
May 20, 2011
I'm currently setting up two VPN 3000 Concentrators at two different sites to create a IPsec LAN-to-LAN Tunnel. I have gone through all the basic configuration guides on the CISCO site, but a LAN-to-LAN session is never created. I have enabled the logs on the Concentrator and it displays no errors at all - it appears the Concentrator is not even trying to establish a IPsec LAN-to-LAN Tunnel.After running through the standard setup provided by CISCO, is there anything I need to do to make the Concentrator try to create a Tunnel, or should this be automatic once all settings are in place?
View 2 Replies
View Related
Aug 18, 2011
I have a asa and Cisco 2811, needs to build a site-to-site ip sec tunnel between them. Due to a requirement need to encrypt inside traffic, i need to apply on the inside interfaces on both devices to build the tunnel.
I don't see a problem but just want to check if it would work on terminating on Inside interfaces on both ip sec peers.
View 1 Replies
View Related
Nov 6, 2011
I am setting up a site to site IPSec VPN between two ASAs.I want to NAT an internal host that my VPN peer's network will be connecting to. So I need to make sure the traffic coming from this internal host is NATted before it enters the VPN tunnel as "interesting traffic"
So let's say remote network 192.168.20.0 /24 is connecting through IPSec VPN tunnel with peers 65.200.1.1 and 198.14.7.10 to host 10.100.1.7 on my network.I want to NAT host 10.100.1.7 to 192.168.100.5 to the remote network connects to the 192 address, not the 10 (I am using a ASA 5505)
View 9 Replies
View Related
Nov 24, 2011
There use to be Cisco 851 routers, but lately these routers are replaced with Cisco 861-K9 routers, and these 861 routers doesn't support DMVPN, instead 851 use to be.
Is there any license file we can upload in 861 router for DMVPN capability, if yes may i know the SKU # for that. We have some customers having 6-7 locations and they are planning to have 2 more locations, we implement already DMVPN in there network, if we go with the 87X or 88X router there price is almost double the price of 861.
View 1 Replies
View Related
Sep 5, 2012
I have a problem with my routers (cisco 1941)I'm running a DMVPN network (Hub and spoke)All the hubs are connected to the 2 hubs. With 4 tunnels. (each hub has 2 interfaces to the spokes. the spokes only have one interface to the hubs, so I splitted them and so I now have 4 dmvpn tunnels). one of the interfaces on a hub malfuntioned and because of that the customers had problems with logging in and sending packets. I made this kind of structure because of when one of the tunnels failed the spoke could use the 3 others... BUT, what happened here was that the spoke still tried to use all 4 of the tunnels and because of that I had 25% package loss!So this didn't work. Now I read about IP SLA, but I was wondering of this could work? (I cannot test it on spare routers, and I don't want to implement it and risking a total network failure...) and how to configure it. Should I make 4 different sla processes which I should all 4 track? And when I make the ip routes, how should I make or configure it so that 1 of the tunnels/interfaces fails that the spoke would addapt the routes?
View 1 Replies
View Related
Sep 11, 2012
I have a setup with two Cisco 877's – 1 for the hub and 1 for the spoke. The hub has a static WAN IP and the spoke has a dynamic WAN IP. The two sites are tunneled with DMVPN and cert auth for connections via Cisco VPN Client (terminating on hub router). All routes between the two sites work fine – I can see through both ends via LAN IPs and tunnel IPs. I can connect externally through Cisco VPN Client and RDP into PC's on the spoke end via local IPs.
My issue is: I want a port forward on the hub router, pointing to the IP (172.16.1.X) of a device on the spoke end. So using the WAN IP of the hub router, I can reach a host on the spoke side. At this point I cannot get this to work and feel it's related to a NATing issue. Here is my current config for both sites:
HUB Router:
!crypto pki server vpn-ca database level names issuer-name CN=*** CA,OU=*** Services,O=*** lifetime crl 336 lifetime certificate 7305 lifetime ca-certificate 7305 lifetime enrollment-request 1000 database url nvram!
crypto pki trustpoint vpn-server enrollment url http://172.16.0.1:80 usage ike serial-number none fqdn none ip-address ***WAN IP*** revocation-check crl rsakeypair vpn-server 2048 auto-enroll 70 regenerate!
crypto pki trustpoint vpn-ca revocation-check crl rsakeypair vpn-ca!
[code]....
View 1 Replies
View Related
Nov 25, 2012
I have a DMVPN network with 2 hubs (2821's). This setup is used for VoIP applications over the Internet for teleworkers. At the main hub site I used to have only 1 Internet feed which was DSL with a static IP. Now I have 2 WAN feeds for this site - 1 FTTB w/ PPPoE & the DSL with static IP. Since this site also hosts a PRI, I want all voice communications to go through the FTTB link instead of the DSL for obvious reasons, but keep the DSL as DMVPN Hub for all NHRP lookups as this link has a static IP address & is very stable. We originally put the PRI router as a DMVPN spoke which connected through the FTTB link, with another router acting as the DMVPN hub on the DSL link. This was obviously a waste of machinery. I want to combine both routers into one. So I tried something like this (don't laugh):
Gi0/0 to FTTB (Dialer1 connects to Internet)
Gi0/1 to DSL (Public IP towards 877 demarc)
Tun0 attaches to Dialer1 public IP and connects to other spokes, no VRF
Tun1 attaches to Gi0/1 public IP and acts as DMVPN hub (ip nhrp map multicast dynamic) under VRF "Hub"
EIGRP AS 1 is set up twice, once under router eigrp 1, and the other using router eigrp 2 using an address-family under the Hub VRF.This kinda works but obviously Tun0 & Tun1 do not speak to each other. I also had to remove the ip nhrp map instruction that pointed to Hub1 on Tun0, as this was causing a weird condition in the router where it was repeatedly trying to connect a tunnel to itself, and crash the router because the NHRP process would go haywire. So my users must rely on the Hub2 to get a NHRP lookup for the PRI site. If Hub2 goes down, everything works in the network except for tunnel connections to the FTTB link. I'd rather not have to configure 2 tunnels on each spoke router unless I really have to.
View 2 Replies
View Related
Jun 27, 2011
I am trying to spec out some routers for a small DMVPN network.I was thinking 2801's for my hub routers.will these run DMVPN out of the box or do they need additional hardware modules?according to the below linkyou need a "AIM-VPN/SSL-2" module in order for it to work, but then according to"The Cisco 2800 Series supports IPSec Digital Encryption Standard (DES), Triple DES (3DES), Advanced Encryption Standard (AES) 128, AES 192, and AES 256 cryptology without consuming an AIM slot."
View 1 Replies
View Related
