PIX before IPSec NAT?

Similar Questions

• IPSec Nat - T

  Dear friends,

  Cisco 800Series platform

  Version of router #Sh

  Example of output

  Cisco IOS software, software C880 (C880DATA-UNIVERSALK9-M), Version 15.2 (4) M4, VERSION of the SOFTWARE (fc2)

  ROM: System Bootstrap, Version 12.4 (22r) YB5, RELEASE SOFTWARE (fc1)

  5 FastEthernet interfaces
  1 module of virtual private network (VPN)
  256K bytes of non-volatile configuration memory.
  125496K bytes of ATA CompactFlash (read/write)

  The details mentioned above is some information on my router and ios

  I use DMVPN on GRE Tunnel and it works fine

  We have a new requirement with another partner, they are shared and asking to configure dry IP VPN to interconnect

  Question: -.

  1. What is the different basis between DMVPN and IP Sec VPN?

  2 is that my router for this?

  3. If Yes, how can I disable NAT - T?, request for partner disable

  4. How can I configure statically Nat translation for indoor and outdoor dry IP VPN traffic?

  If I'm dry IP configuration THAT VPN is there any problem will affect my existing DMVPN?

  Please can someone help me?

  > 1. What is the different basis between DMVPN and IP Sec VPN?

  DMVPN is also using IPsec to protect traffic. But DMVPN adds also multipoint GRE and PNDH for additional features.

  > 2. Is that my router for this?

  Well, you use... ;-)

  > 3. If yes how can I disable NAT - T?, request for partner disable

  First ask them why they want to disable. NAT - T is part of the IPsec standard and only adds an additional UDP header if there is a NAT. If there is no NAT between the peers, NAT - T will not change the encapsulation. If the partner needs to be turned off, then they probably use a platform implementation of shit.

  If you still want to disable it:

  no crypto ipsec nat-transparency udp-encapsulation

  > 4. How can I configure statically Nat translation for indoor and outdoor dry IP VPN traffic? NAT is done before the encryption. Just set up your NAT rules to translate your traffic. The translated traffic is then put in correspondence with the crypto-ACL. > If I'm dry IP configuration THAT VPN is there any problem will affect my existing DMVPN? The two can co-exist. But for sure, when you configure something wrong, you can cause problems for your existing configuration.

• PIX support IPsec over UDP or TCP

  Series 500 firewall Cisco PIX support IPsec over UDP or TCP so that the secure tunnel VPN IPsec can go through the PAT and NAT. If so, how to configure it? THX

  Concerning

  Jeffrey

  Hi Jeff,

  The tentative date is around end of March 2003.

  Kind regards

  Arul

• Remote monitoring Pix on IPSEC site to site VPN

  I have a few 501 s PIX that connect through the VPN site-to site. We use Orion NPM and I can't add monitoring. I was able to add remote routers that connect through site-to-site VPNs. I guess that the rules of the Pix security/NAT prevent that. The configuration of the remote Pix is attached.

  You need on the 2800...

  access-list 131 permit ip host 172.16.30.19 24.172.234.126

• PIX, IOS ipsec troubleshooting commands

  I'm checking isakmp and negotiate IPsec between a PIX 535 and a router in 1711, but do not have knowledge of the command to check the Phase 1 and Phase 2 on both devices. They ping each other, then connectivity is not a problem, but I have no evidence of the negotiations going on on the other end.

  Does anyone know what the ' see the #' orders are to check active negotiations of Phase 1 and Phase 2 between these boxes?

  Thank you

  Marc

  Hi Marc,

  The basic display orders are ' show crypto isakmp his ' ' show crypto ipsec his ' to show active sessions in search "QM-IDLE" on the isakmp his and active incoming and outgoing his on ipsec.

  Debugs is also useful for establishing where a problem might ask. "debug crypto isakmp" debug crypto ipsec' ''(router only) engine debug crypto.

  The following doc is a good source of info.

  http://www.Cisco.com/en/us/Tech/tk583/TK372/technologies_tech_note09186a00800949c5.shtml

  Good luck

  Paul.

• PIX + Rotary static NAT to load balance?

  You can load balance of static behind a PIX with nat servers as you can do it on a router cisco (rotating)?

  * If Yes, someone at - it had a link to an example?

  Hakuna Mete.

  Hello Hakuna,

  Unfortunately, this is not possible on the PIX. Sorry!

  Renault

• Problem with VPN client connecting the PIX of IPSec.

  PIX # 17 Sep 14:58:51 [IKEv1 DEBUG]: IP = Y, IKE Peer included IKE fragmentation capability flags: Main Mode: real aggressive Mode: false

  Sep 17 14:58:51 [IKEv1]: IP = Y, landed on tunnel_group connection

  Sep 17 14:58:51 [IKEv1 DEBUG]: Group = X, IP = Y, IKE SA proposal # 1, transform # 13 entry overall IKE acceptable matches # 1

  Sep 17 14:58:58 [IKEv1]: Group = X, Username = X, IP = Y, the authenticated user (X).

  Sep 17 14:58:58 [IKEv1]: Group = X, Username = X, IP = Y, mode of transaction attribute not supported received: 5

  Sep 17 14:58:58 [IKEv1]: Group = X, Username = X, Y = IP, Type of customer: Client Windows NT Version of the Application: 5.0.06.0160

  Sep 17 14:58:58 [IKEv1]: Group = Xe, Username = X, IP = Y, assigned private IP 10.0.1.7 remote user address

  Sep 17 14:58:58 [IKEv1 DEBUG]: Group = X, Username = X, IP = Y, fast Mode resumed treatment, Cert/Trans Exch/RM IDDM

  Sep 17 14:58:58 [IKEv1]: Group = X, Username = X, IP = Y, PHASE 1 COMPLETED

  Sep 17 14:58:58 [IKEv1]: IP = Y, Keep-alive type for this connection: DPD

  Sep 17 14:58:58 [IKEv1 DEBUG]: Group = X, Username = X, Y = IP, timer to generate a new key to start P1: 6840 seconds.

  Sep 17 14:58:58 [IKEv1]: Group = X, Username = X, Y = IP, data received in payload ID remote Proxy Host: address 10.0.1.7, protocol 0, Port 0

  Sep 17 14:58:58 [IKEv1]: Group = X, Username = X, IP = Y, received data IP Proxy local subnet in payload ID: address 0.0.0.0 Mask 0.0.0.0, protocol 0, Port 0

  Sep 17 14:58:58 [IKEv1]: Group = X, Username = X, IP = Y, his old QM IsRekeyed not found addr

  Sep 17 14:58:58 [IKEv1]: Group = X, Username = X, Y = IP, remote peer IKE configured crypto card: outside_dyn_map

  Sep 17 14:58:58 [IKEv1 DEBUG]: Group = X, Username = X, Y = IP, IPSec processing SA payload

  Sep 17 14:58:58 [IKEv1 DEBUG]: Group = X, Username = X, Y = IP, IPSec SA proposal # 14, turn # 1 entry overall SA IPSec acceptable matches # 20

  Sep 17 14:58:58 [IKEv1]: Group = X, Username = X, IP = Y, IKE: asking SPI!

  Sep 17 14:58:58 [IKEv1]: Group = X, Username = X, Y = IP, IPSec initiator of the substitution of regeneration of the key duration to 2147483 to 7200 seconds

  Sep 17 14:58:58 [IKEv1 DEBUG]: Group = X, Username = X, IP = Y, passing the Id of the Proxy:

  Remote host: 10.0.1.7 Protocol Port 0 0

  Local subnet: 0.0.0.0 mask 0.0.0.0 Protocol Port 0 0

  Sep 17 14:58:58 [IKEv1 DEBUG]: Group = X, Username = X, IP = notification sending answering MACHINE service LIFE of the initiator

  Sep 17 14:58:58 [IKEv1]: Group = X, Username = X, IP = Y, the security negotiation is complete for the user (slalanne) answering machine, Inbound SPI = 0 x 6

  044adb5, outbound SPI = 0xcd82f95e

  Sep 17 14:58:58 [IKEv1 DEBUG]: Group = X, Username = X, Y = IP, timer to generate a new key to start P2: 6840 seconds.

  Sep 17 14:58:58 [IKEv1]: Group = X, Username = X, IP = Y, adding static route to the customer's address: 10.0.1.7

  Sep 17 14:58:58 [IKEv1]: Group = X, Username = X, IP = Y, PHASE 2 COMPLETED (msgid = c4d80320)

  PIX # 17 Sep 14:59:40 [IKEv1]: Group = X, Username = X, Y = IP, Connection over for homologous X.  Reason: Peer terminate remote Proxy 10.0.1.7, 0.0.0.0Sep Proxy Local 17 14:59:40 [IKEv1 DEBUG]: Group = X, Username = X, IP = Y, IKE removing SA: 10.0.1.7 Remote Proxy, Proxy Local 0.0.0.0

  Sep 17 14:59:40 [IKEv1]: IP = Y, encrypted packet received with any HIS correspondent, drop

  Then debugging IPSec are also normal.

  Now this user is a disconnect and other clients to connect normally. the former user is trying to connect to the site and here is the difference in debugging:

  Sep 17 14:25:22 [IKEv1]: Group = X, Username = X, Y = IP, tunnel IPSec rejecting: no entry card crypto for remote proxy proxy 10.0.1.8/255.255.255.255/0/0 local 0.0.0.0/0.0.0.0/0/0 on the interface outside
  Sep 17 14:25:22 [IKEv1]: Group = X, Username = X, IP = Y, error QM WSF (P2 struct & 0x2a5fd68, mess id 0x16b59315).
  Sep 17 14:25:22 [IKEv1 DEBUG]: Group = X, Username = X, IP = O, case of mistaken IKE responder QM WSF (struct & 0x2a5fd68) , :
  QM_DONE, EV_ERROR--> QM_BLD_MSG2, EV_NEGO_SA--> QM_BLD_MSG2, EV_IS_REKEY--> QM_BL
  D_MSG2, EV_CONFIRM_SA--> QM_BLD_MSG2, EV_PROC_MSG--> QM_BLD_MSG2, EV_HASH_OK--> QM_
  BLD_MSG2, NullEvent--> QM_BLD_MSG2, EV_COMP_HASH
  Sep 17 14:25:22 [IKEv1]: Group = X, Username = X, IP = Y, peer table correlator withdrawal failed, no match!
  Sep 17 14:25:22 [IKEv1]: IP = Y, encrypted packet received with any HIS correspondent, drop

  Here is the config VPN... and I don't see what the problem is:

  Dynamic crypto map outside_dyn_map 20 match address outside_cryptomap_dyn_20
  Crypto-map dynamic outside_dyn_map 20 the transform-set ESP-DES-MD5 value
  life together - the association of security crypto dynamic-map outside_dyn_map 20 seconds 7200
  map outside_map 65535-isakmp ipsec crypto dynamic outside_dyn_map
  outside_map interface card crypto outside
  ISAKMP crypto identity hostname
  crypto ISAKMP allow outside
  crypto ISAKMP policy 20
  preshared authentication
  the Encryption
  md5 hash
  Group 2
  life 7200
  crypto ISAKMP policy 65535
  preshared authentication
  the Encryption
  sha hash
  Group 2
  life 86400

  outside_cryptomap_dyn_20 list of allowed ip extended access any 10.0.1.0 255.255.255.248

  attributes global-tunnel-group DefaultRAGroup
  authentication-server-group (outside LOCAL)
  Type-X group tunnel ipsec-ra
  tunnel-group X general attributes
  address pool addresses
  authentication-server-group (outside LOCAL)
  Group Policy - by default-X
  tunnel-group X ipsec-attributes
  pre-shared-key *.
  context of prompt hostname

  mask of 10.0.1.6 - 10.0.1.40 IP local pool 255.255.255.0

  Please remove the acl of the dynamic encryption card crypto, it causes odd behavior

  try to use split instead of the acl acl in dynamic crypto map, and let me know how it goes

• PIX 515E without NAT from upper to lower

  Dear all,

  Pls find attached schema and configuration PIX 102 and 105 PIX.

  Network 192.168.105.x, 192.168.102.x can communicate with the outside world and from the outside we can access 192.168.102.x some open ports.

  192.168.105.1is on the interface of higher security and 192.168.102.3 is on the low safety for PIX105 interface.

  192.168.105.x can communicate with 192.168.102.x using NAT.

  Now the question is:

  192.168.105.x cannot communicate with 192.168.102.x without Tried NAT. using the special conversion rules and Nat 0 but cannot continue to communicate.

  192.168.105.X is unable to connect to 192.168.101.x (road via PIX 102 and router)

  192.168.101.X cannot communicate with 192.168.102.x

  I don't want NAT to use between 192.168.105.x, 192.168.102.x and 192.168.101.X

  Grateful if you can help do ASAP

  Kind regards

  Prashanth

  you said "192.168.101.x need to access 192.168.102.x for object group dc."

  provide that you will speak the traffic is initiated by sous-reseau.101 for sous-reseau.102, then you need to apply another State on pix102.

  for example

  static (intf2, inside) 192.168.101.0 192.168.101.0 netmask 255.255.255.0

  clear xlate

  Apart from that, I see no error with the two pix, the config of the router config.

  to check the question it either relates to the data center router, try ping pix102.

  First, ping the int data center router series, then ping the router the data center sous-reseau.101.

• L2l VPN with IPSEC NAT

  Hi all!

  I have a question about L2L VPN and NAT.

  Can I set up the VPN tunnel between two ASAs or routers using the NAT translation from within the private IP addresses to a single public IP address outside the interface and then implement interesting crypto with the source of the public IP address and the destination of the remote private network on the other end (also ASA). For example, I want to translate a private network to the public ip address at one end and use the VPN tunnel with a public IP address as the source. Policy-NAT is not an option, because we really do not want to provide any IP address to the remote end, and IP addresses of the remote end can overlap with our end.

  Thank you!

  Hello

  You can definitely set up an IPSec tunnel between two devices in the translation of your subnet in a single public IP address. You just create the translation and as you mentioned define interesting traffic using the public IP address.

  This is exactly what we call political NAT, I don't understand why you say that NAT policy is not an option. Perhapps you misunderstood concept NAT policy or I misunderstood your question.

  For example, assuming that the LAN private at your side is 172.16.1.0/24, the remote subnet is 192.168.150.0/24, and that the public IP address that you want to use is 200.200.200.200 your NAT config should look like this:

  access-list 199 permit ip 172.16.1.0 255.255.252.0 192.168.150.0 255.255.255.0

  Global (outside) 6 200.200.200.200

  NAT (inside) 6 access-L199

  Which would be NAT traffic to the public IP address only when the traffic matches the ACL.

  Your ACL crypto should then be something like

  cryptomap list of allowed access host ip 200.200.200.200 192.168.150.0 255.255.255.0

  That would hide your address real and all they see is the public IP address you give them. Note that since the NAT takes place on your side your side will be able to raise the tunnel.

  I hope this helps.

  Raga

• IPSec vs on IPSec NAT - T

  I would like an explanation between the two terms.

  I do a remote work while I do some traveling. Normally, when I work from home my VPN connection uses the IPSecOverNatT Protocol when I discover the current VPN connections through ASDM. I am currently on a University campus and my connection is now just ordinary IPSec protocol. What causes this change and what is the change?

  It will use only NAT - T (4500/UDP), if the path has configured PAT. Because the plain (ESP) IPSEC is a Protocol, not a TCP or UDP port number, it cannot pass through a PAT instrument, so during the IPSEC negotiation, if it detects it is PAT in the path, it uses NAT - T. Otherwise, it will use the regular ESP package.

  Hope that answers your question.

• PIX 515E DMZ NAT

  We have recently acquired a new partner that is connected by a frame relay to our DMZ.

  Here's my problem. The router (frame relay) is in our DMZ their public addresses to our addresses in the DMZ to NATS

  172.16.10.90 ftp port

  172.16.10.4 port 9100

  172.16.10.5 port 9100

  172.16.10.6 port 9100

  I want to take the source address and the NAT inside our network:

  10.10.2.90

  10.10.2.4

  10.10.2.5

  10.10.2.6

  I don't have physical devices in the DMZ for these addresses and I have not been able pass traffic back from the demilitarized zone. I have access lists allowing traffic to DMZ 172.16.10.x inside the 10.10.2.x via the appropriate ports.

  Currently, we have our Web server and a mail gateway in the demilitarized zone, I want to do this without changing the overall or to compromise the DMZ rules that are currently in place.

  Thank you for your help

  This feature is available in 6.3 + codes

  upgrade to the latest code what 6.3.4

• ASA 5520 IPSec NAT question

  I like more than 150 of VPN on my ASA 5520.  A specific customer, with that I'll put up a VPN has an overlap of two of the intellectual property, it must reach from its internal network.  It is NATing 10.251.11.177 internal network traffic to my ASA presents itself as 10.251.11.177 of the 10.251.11.176/29 network.  Now the two IP of its internal network, it must reach are 10.1.254.200 and 10.1.254.201.

  Thus, following the documentation on the site Web of Cisco I'm doing Policy Based Routing on the ASA 5520 (my thesis) so that its traffic will 1.1.1.1 and 1.1.1.2 instead of 10.1.254.200 and 10.1.254.201.  Once it reaches my ASA 5520 it gets back to these IP tranlated.

  I am using the following configuration, but when I try to add static entries, it won't let me add them.  I even tried "static 1.1.1.1 (exterior, Interior) POLICYNAT of the access list" with the ACL in reverse but no use.

  object-group, network VPN-map

  network-object host 1.1.1.1

  network-object host 1.1.1.2

  !

  POLICYNAT list extended access allowed host ip 10.1.254.200 10.251.11.176 255.255.255.248

  POLICYNAT list extended access allowed host ip 10.1.254.201 10.251.11.176 255.255.255.248

  !

  static (inside, outside) 1.1.1.1 access-list POLICYNAT

  public static (inside, outside) 1.1.1.2 - POLICYNAT access list

  Try breaking the IPs in two ACL

  POLICYNAT1 list extended access allowed host ip 10.1.254.200 10.251.11.176 255.255.255.248

  POLICYNAT2 list extended access allowed host ip 10.1.254.201 10.251.11.176 255.255.255.248

  !

  static (inside, outside) 1.1.1.1 access-list POLICYNAT1

  public static (inside, outside) 1.1.1.2 - POLICYNAT2 access list

  HTH

  GE

• IPSec over TCP on PIX 501F to the catalog

  Hello

  Is there a way I can configure IPSec over TCP as default configuration in the PIX firewall. I'm under 6.3

  The PIX does not support IPsec over TCP. It doesn't support NAT - T, which is IPSec over UDP/4500, which houses also of the Cisco VPN client. Just add the following command on the PIX:

  ISAKMP nat-traversal

  The PIX and VPN client auto-négociera if necessary IPSec encapsulation. See http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/iaabu/pix/pix_sw/v_63/cmdref/gl.htm#wp1027312 for more details.

• VRF aware IPSEC and NAT

  Hello world.

  I ' am having a Hub router and 2 routers Spoke with LAN - IP - address range overlap.

  ->-10.47.1.0/24 routerA

  /

  172.16.1.0 - VRFR

  \

  -> RouterB-10.47.1.0/24

  I use road maps to get the different local host for the VRF different side of the hub (no problem)

  I use the VRF aware IPSEC functionality to get to the different networks - talk without nat (no problem)

  My main question is that I have to do nat on the router HUB - I need to translate the host on the HUB - local LAN IP-addresses defined by the different LAN talk Administraors.

  These NAT-ranges may be different / might overlap for the different VRF.

  My problem is that I have no idea how to do to get NAT traffic ' ed correctly (after the road-map, before IPSEC).

  If you have an idea / if you solved the problem

  -I would be grateful for a hint of /Clue / THE Solution.

  Thanks in advance

  Jarle

  Hi Nelly,

  I finally found a router to test on it. I'm still trying to make it work with a single site without NAT. Without success so far, the card encryption is not triggered.

  Question: what this line do exactly? IP route vrf VRF1 10.47.2.0 255.255.255.0 200.200.200.1 global

  I guess that's only in the anticipation of your originating stuff.

  In a NAT environment, no, do you still need an ip route vrf command?

  What is the result of your sh ip vrf interface?

  Is this ok for the vrf to be associated only to the loopback interface?

  No clue on how to solve this?

  Regarding your last comment, your crypto card should be ok. Packets are translated before being treated by the encryption engine. See the link

  http://www.Cisco.com/warp/public/556/5.html

  I would try

  interface Ethernet0/0

  IP nat inside

  interface Ethernet1/0

  NAT outside IP

  IP nat inside source static network 10.47.1.0 10.47.2.0/24 VRF1 vrf

  Thank you

  Michel

• PIX and NAT - T

  Hi all

  I have a small question. I have a couple of users who use routers to connect by VPN to our pix that authenticates by a RAY for L2TP connections. I enabled the NAT - T on our PIX and they may not always connect. Is there anything I might have missed. I checked most of the posts in this forum do not see anything else, I should have activated.

  Can anyone help?

  Thanks in advance.

  Michael

  A tunnel of Lan-to-Lan of a router in a PIX does not NAT - T, unless there is NAT devices between two end points. If this is the case, you must ensure that both the software both from the end of rehbeh points devices support this capability. An example of a router to tunnel PIX IPSec configuration is available at http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/hw/vpndevc/ps2030/products_configuration_example09186a0080094498.shtml

  Another example that deals with the same configuration with NAT is available at

  http://www.Cisco.com/en/us/Tech/tk583/TK372/technologies_configuration_example09186a0080094a87.shtml