IOS VPN 3030

Hello group,

I have a small request. I have a VPN 3030 hub, which has installed in IOS 4.1.5. I do not have the 4.1.5 image right now with me and is available for download in cisco. I need this image to another customer. Can I download the 4.1.5 IOS image from the hub? I had seen the tftp option, but it doesn't seem to work.

Kind regards

REDA

You will need to open a TAC case and they can provide it for you. Unfortunately you cannot not TFTP image off the hub.

Tags: Cisco Security

Similar Questions

  • Impossible to get WebVPN working on chassis VPN 3030

    This v4.1.7P chassis works perfectly for our installation of the client vpn Cisco, no problem. We have decided to extend its usefulness by turning on and configuring WebVPN.

    I did it on a router IOS, Cisco 1841, works very well, so I'm following the same basic procedure to activate it on our vpn 3030.

    But when trying to connect to the vpn 3030 to the public interface of an internet ISP, I even don't get a login window, error, same no nothing. Finally the browser times out and stops.

    I did all the usual steps to enable WebVPN, yet nothing seems to work. I can't admin the box fine internally via https, so I know that work self-signed certificates.

    Any ideas where the attack of this of?

    Thanks, Jeff

    Hi Jeff,

    Try to upgrade to 4.7.x

    This generation of OS is fully operational with WebVPN.

    Check http://cisco.com/en/US/products/hw/vpndevc/ps2284/products_configuration_example09186a008055641a.shtml

    You can ignore the Client SSL part and troubleshoot why didn't not now works for your environment.

    For a complete list of commands/options check:

    http://Cisco.com/en/us/products/HW/vpndevc/ps2284/products_configuration_guide_book09186a00801f1c6d.html

    Please rate if this helped.

    Kind regards

    Daniel

  • VPN 3030 - balancing problem

    Hi all

    I had set up on VPN 3030 of load balancing. On it, he had a few problems. Firstly, 3030 high school has more RAM (512) that the primary (128). The secondary was purchased just a month back with 512 M RAM and latest OS 4.1.7.

    (1) land of redirected to the secondary hub, after active LB normal VPN clients. There are more than 10-15 connections that landed on the secondary and none landed on the primary. I understand that this is because the captain now less connections... is that good? But why is there not all connections on the master?

    (2) web VPN didn't work that well with load balancing enabled. HTTPS protocol and the virtual IP address does not work. When tried with the physical separately IPs, it works, but not with the virtual IP address. port 443 opens not with the virtual IP address. Why is this? can I configure something else for this?

    I also noticed that once you activate load balancing, redirection is done directly on physical IP addresses, which means that end users will know the physical IP addresses and connect directly if they need. Why is this? can someone shed light on this?

    REDA

    To answer one of your questions, I think that primary will have connections only when the secondary a number of minimum connections...

  • L2L IOS VPN question

    Hello

    I created a vpn between two routers in two different sites. The VPN works well, but I noticed something that I can ping from peer1 at peer2 however the tunnel although the ACL of the interesting traffic allows no icmp between two counterparts, it is configured as follows:

    access-list 120 allow ip 10.10.10.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.2.0 255.255.255.0

    access-list 120 allow ip 1.1.1.1 host 2.2.2.2

    No icmp is allowed, but the icmp traffic is encapsulated, encrypted, and through the tunnel, why?

    Hello moahmed1981,

    When you configure access-list for IPs, so it includes ICMP, TCP, and UDP, therefore, it is expected that you will be able to ping across the tunnel.

    If you want to change this, please configure the VPN filter to prevent the ping to the vpn tunnel.
    Here's a doc for your reference:-
    https://popravak.WordPress.com/2011/11/07/Cisco-IOS-VPN-filter/

    Kind regards
    Dinesh Moudgil

    PS Please rate helpful messages.

  • L2l ios VPN does not

    Hi all

    I am reproducing my client on the GNS scénarion.

    It is a frank l2l ios vpn and I use on two NAT routers.

    When I train trigger (ping using the source interface) VPN, VPN is not coming, and there is no error during the isakmp debug

    Please go through the configuration below and suggest me

    Thanks toufik

    It does not appear to be configured for each LAN routing. May need to configure the default route on each router to point to the other.

    In addition, enabling the option 'enable isakmp crypto '.

    All the other configuration looks OK.

  • Can I block the user to connect to the VPN 3030 by type of customer or version?

    I would like to block some users who use to connect to our VPN 3030 client Win98 or very old version of VPN client.

    Is there a way to set up my VPN 3030 so I can block customers? I don't want to push new customer for them or that you don't have a server radius or something like that to put them on an isolated network independent.

    I want to configure VPN 3030, is it possible?

    Thank you.

    Jayesh,

    Reach:

    Configuration | User management | Groups

    Go to the specific group and click on modify.

    On the IPSec tab, you will see a section for:

    Customer type & Version limiting

    For example:

    p *: 4.7*

    This will allow the version 4.7 of customers.

    See you soon

    Gilbert

    Write it down, if it can help

  • IOS VPN LAN Local access

    It has been 7 years, this feature available in the IOS is still?

    https://supportforums.Cisco.com/message/263861

    Basically I connect Cisco VPN for an IOS VPN client.  I want everything, except for the local subnets some tunnel.  A little like split tunneling except internet traffic goes through the VPN.

    Thank you

    Hi Steven,

    As I said refuse statements do not work with split-ACL, but what you can do is to rebuild the split-acl. Delete rejects him and the "permit ip any any" instead you will have to allow all the internet... to clarify, in your case, it seems that you don't want to tunnel all traffic to the following subnets:

    1. 10.32.0.0/16
    2. 10.34.0.0/16
    3. 10.42.0.0/16
    4. 10.252.0.0/16

    so in your case the split-acl must include all other possible subnets. While this will make the really long acl, it's the only way to do that. The acl can be reduced by using appropriate summarizations. for example

    128.0.0.0 generic 127.255.255.255

    Kind regards

    ATRI.

  • VPN 3030 load balancing

    Hi all

    Asked me to configure the load balancing between two hub Cisco VPN (Cisco VPN 3030).

    I set up two such boxes mentioned in the cisco Web site

    [url] https://www.Cisco.com/en/us/products/HW/vpndevc/ps2284/products_tech_note09186a0080094b4a.shtml [url]

    After you enable VPN load balancing, I get the error described for 30 seconds.

    Quote:

    Master double detected LBSSF [0003a 0889463] and going to SLAVE

    One of my friends said me that try with encryption active but not different.

    I searched in google but did not get any solution. I am now hlepless. If any of you guys have met this kind of problem before could you please help to solve this problem...

    Thank you

    Please set each device to have different priorities and then charge two devices.

    If this does not work then you can confirm your settings of the VCA have been properly configured and applied to the public interface? The following links provide more details on how to configure filters VCA:

    https://www.Cisco.com/en/us/products/HW/vpndevc/ps2284/products_tech_note09186a0080094b4a.shtml#C2

    Kind regards
    ATRI

  • Simple IOS VPN IPsec HUB and Spoke failover HUB

    Hi all

    I have a nd architecture VPN Hub spoke with Asit, IKEv1 and IPsec.

    My hub is connected to a single service provider.

    I wish I had a hardware redundancy for my hub.

    Instead of creating a double tunnel in each Department, I would like to use my router 4000ISR failover protocol.

    Is it possible to simply achieve?

    If I use IOS IPsec failover that I need to deploy my changes on the two router or (such as ASA) I can set the active router and allow the watch to receive the chenges?

    Thanks to you all.

    Johnny

    If your ISP connection is one that has a routed block and you can connect two routers same in it, you can then configure HSRP.

    The source of the Tunnel becomes the HSRP address.  Rays may not know that there are two routers.

    Easy failover.

    Alternatively, you can have a single tunnel with hubs double (if you do not use HSRP).  You don't have to borrow the double tunnels.

  • iPhone 2.0 & 2811 IOS VPN

    Hello

    My iPhone can establish a session isakmp and get an address IP etc with my IOS 12.4 VPN on a cisco 2811.

    However, when I try and pass traffic, the connection of 2 ipsec phase ends the tunnel.

    I get the error as

    IPSec invalidated policy proposal

    Jul 31 13:13:32.590: ISAKMP:(0:791:HW:2): politics of ITS phase 2 is not acceptable!

    and also

    CRYPTO-6-IKMP_MODE_FAILURE: fast mode processing failed with the peer to

    Someone at - it an iPhone 2.0 to work with a 2811?

    It works with an ASA (not sure which model however)

    Thank you

    Take a look at this:

    http://discussions.Apple.com/thread.jspa?MessageID=7221787�

    http://www.Cisco.com/en/us/docs/security/vpn_client/cisco_vpn_client/iPhone/2.0/connectivity/guide/iPhone.html

    "What Cisco platforms work with Cisco VPN Client on the iPhone?

    PIX firewall and Cisco ASA 5500 security equipment. We recommend the latest version of the software 8.0.x (or), but you can also use software 7.2.x.

    Routers of Cisco IOS nor series VPN 3000 Concentrators VPN supports iPhone VPN features. "

    Concerning

    Farrukh

  • Even IOS VPN Interface Internet Access issue

    Hi all

    I was wondering if there was any equivalent to these orders of ASA 5510 to put on a cisco IOS router 2811.

    Split-tunnel-policy excludespecified

    value of Split-tunnel-network-list LOCAL_LAN_ACCESS

    What I want to achieve is to give internet access to my vpn users without creating a split tunnel, which means the vpn user turns off the Internet on the same interface on that their vpn router ends.

    Is a 2811 for this there docs? I could not find the doc for it...

    TIA,

    -Fred

    Try this link

    Public Internet on a stick

    http://www.Cisco.com/en/us/products/sw/secursw/ps2308/products_configuration_example09186a008073b06b.shtml#intro

    Rgds

    Jorge

  • What VPN Cisco IOS VPN and RADIUS client?

    Hello community,

    My company are trying to set up the remote user VPN for all of our external collaborators to the help of our existing Cisco router and a RADIUS server in Active Directory.

    I did all the AAA config on the router and set up the RADIUS, but I do not know what customer buy Cisco Remote and how to set up.

    Anyone who knows this set upwards or it uses can be me help please we don't lose our money (and my boss time!)?

    Thanks in advance.

    Paul

    Paul,

    AnyConnect lets connect you using IKEv2/IPsec and SSLVPN for IOS network head.

    There are countless examples of configuration.

    Alternatively, some clients of IKEv1/IPsec 3rd party exists and are able to connect, however is those who are not TAC (Cisco) supported. You can check the feature called ezvpn

    M.

  • Unauthorized access admin on VPN 3030.

    Hello

    ACS 4.1

    2 x 3030 concentrators ver 4.7

    I have problems with administrative access to our backup c3030 VPN via GANYMEDE.

    Scenario: We have a live and a c3030 backup. They will be configured VRRP failover in case of failure on the direct c3030. The direct c3030 is enabled on GANYMEDE and all access is fine.

    According to the doc cisco here:

    http://www.Cisco.com/en/us/products/HW/vpndevc/ps2284/products_configuration_example09186a0080093fe0.shtml

    .. .privilege level is set to 15 on the admin on the c3030 user as well as on the GANYMEDE group, as I have said - everything works fine on the direct c3030.

    I now backup c3030 added the same device group of GANYMEDE network and configured the c3030 with exactly the same setup ACS as the direct c3030. We can log to the backup c3030 via GANYMEDE, we cannot access the admin section and get the error "you don't have sufficient permission to access the specified page.".

    This was curious me for quite awhile, it there's nothing I can find on the web and short to wipe the backup c3030 and back that I'm not sure that there is something we can do?

    I hope that someone out there encountered this problem?

    See you soon.

    I wanted to make sure was, when we try to connect to VPNC (backup), the newspaper of Pass that we obtain NAS IP address as private IP of the interface on the ACS reports. It is, then that's fine.

    This may sound weird, if you have multiple local users on VPNC with 'same' privilege level, change them at the level of different privileges and keep admin 15. And then try again. I think you should have access to consoles, do?

    Kind regards

    Prem

    Please rate if this can help!

  • IOS VPN on 7200 12.3.1 and access-list problem

    I'm in IOS 12.3 (1) a 7200 and have configured it for VPN access. I use the Cisco VPN client. Wonder if someone has encountered the following problem, and if there is a fix.

    The external interface has the access-list standard applied that blocks incoming traffic. One of the rules is to block the IPs private, not routable, such as the 10.0.0.0 concern, for example.

    When I set my VPN connection, none of my packets get routed and I noticed that outside access list interface blocks the traffic. When I connect to the router through VPN, the router attributes to the client an IP address from a pool of the VPN as 10.1.1.0/24. But normal outside the access list denies this traffic as it should. But as soon as I have established a VPN connect, it seems that my encrypted VPN traffic must ignore the external interface access list.

    If I change my external access list to allow traffic from source address 10.1.1.0/24 my VPN traffic goes through correctly, but this goes against the application to have an outdoor access list that denies such traffic and have a VPN.

    Anyone else seen this problem or can recommend a software patch or version of IOS which works correctly?

    Thank you

    R

    That's how IOS has always worked, no way around it.

    The reasoning is to do with the internal routing on the router. Basically an encrypted packet inherits from the interface and initially past control of ACL as an encrypted packet. Then expelled the crypto engine and decrypted, so we now have this sitting pouch in the cryptographic engine part of the router. What do we with her now, keeping in mind users may want political route she is also, might want to exercise, qos, etc. etc. For this reason, the package is basically delivered on the external interface and running through everything, once again, this time as a decrypted packet. If the package hits the ACL twice, once encrypted and clear once.

    Your external ACL shall include the non encrypted and encrypted form of the package.

    Now, if you're afraid that people can then simply spoof packets to come from 10.1.1.0 and they will be allowed through your router, bzzzt, wrong. The first thing that the router checks when it receives a packet on an interface with a card encryption applied is that if the package needs to be encrypted, it is from his crypto ACL and its IP pools. If he receives a decrypted packet when it knows that it must have been encrypted, it will drop the package immediately and a flag a syslog something as "received the decrypted packet when it should have been."

    You can check on the old bug on this here:

    http://www.Cisco.com/cgi-bin/support/Bugtool/onebug.pl?BugID=CSCdz54626&submit=search

    and take note of the section of the security implications, you may need to slightly modify your configuration.

  • Validation of the IOS VPN peer identity IP with NAT - T

    I just lost a lot of time to understand this behavior of the IOS. My conclusion reached: If you work with the good old peer identity address validation in profiles ISAKMP and the peer you are talking about is located behind a NAT, you must use the private IP address of the peer in the command "adapter address of the identity". I thought that NAT - T takes care of the translation in all sections of required configuration, but here especially, seems not so much. The interesting thing is that for all other orders, you must use the public IP address.

    See the following example (showing only the relevant articles with statements by peer inside):

    door-key crypto OUR_KEYRING

    key pre-shared key address 1.2.3.4

    Crypto isakmp PROFILE_NAME profile

    VRF TEST

    key ring OUR_KEYRING

    function identity address 192.168.99.5 255.255.255.255

    OUR_MAP 6 ipsec-isakmp crypto map

    defined peer 1.2.3.4

    the value of PROFILE_NAME isakmp-profile

    Does anyone know if this is normal or if it is a bug? It would be useful and consistent if NAT - T changed the identity of the peer address during the phase 1 negotiation, then we would not deal with peer private addressing within site to site VPN configs. I also think of IP scenarios that overlap that may occur when you work with dealing with private peer.

    See the release of relevant debugging in the attachment, after documenting a failed connection attempt (using the public, NATted IP of the peer in the command 'fit the address of identity') and once a following connection attempt (using the IP private, internal counterpart).

    My router is a C2951 with IOS 15.3 (2) T2. The counterpart is an ASA (version & unknown config so far, but I'm sure that the other engineer did not indicate what it is using a private address in its config, despite my session from behind a NAT router, too).

    Thank you & best regards

    Toni

    Toni,

    Problem with identity is that it is an encrypted package (in Exchange MM) so cannot be changed in transit, so that a host may not know reliably it is the external IP address (it can make assumptions, but he doesn't know how long it is valid for).

    Also if you "NAT 'd" identity you can't the difference between two devices behind same NAT/PAT on end of answering machine.

    There are some implmentations IKE allowing IKE to identity type and value to specify manually. IOS not among them.

    Yes decouple us identity and peer of the intellectual property, it adds flexability with a few corner cases which may arrise.

    Yet another reason why NAT is evil?

    M.

Maybe you are looking for