several customers behind peripheral pptp firewall/nat at vpn3015

Similar Questions

• Place a server behind a PIX firewall production

  Hi all

  We currently have a web server that is connected to the Internet directly (multiple addressable IPs belonging to 5 different ranges of class C, with a soft firewall).

  There are several Web sites, some of them with their own IP addresses, some of them sharing IPs with other sites.

  We intend to put a server behind a PIX firewall and convert addressable IP addresses to private IPs with the static mapping on the PIX.

  We plan use a PIX with two (2) interfaces.

  You think it of feasible or are there things that I'm on?

  Some things I'm not sure about:

  Since there are several C class IPs assigned to the server and therefore 5 gateways defined on a NIC, one for each class, how that is defined on the PIX? 5 separate roads or...?

  We need to use a kind of "virtual interfaces", one for each class C subnet?

  This is an example of a "final product":

  Web request to the 204.xxx.85.10 IP addressable would be directed to the private IP address: 10.xxx.85.10.

  Web request to the 204.xxx.86.10 IP addressable would go to 10.xxx.86.10 etc etc.

  Any help you could provide in this regard will be GREATLY apprechiated!

  Hello

  Please provide a topology (plain text would work). I can't tell from your description, if you have a perimeter router in front of the Pix. In addition, when you write statements of static road on the Pix, you must include an interface as follows

  Route if_name IPAddress netmask gateway_ip

  Once you post this information, I'll take another reading to better understand your situation.

  Thank you

• During the closure after a browsing session I find several windows behind the window of the main browser I have not opened and they must be closed individually. What is the cause and how can I stop it?

  During the closure after a browsing session I find several windows behind the window of the main browser I have not opened and they must be closed individually. What is the cause and how can I stop it? Edit

  These windows display ads? They could be 'pop-under' designed to show when you are finished with your main window. Orbitz has these, for example. Irritating. I'm not sure of the best solution, i.e., advertising blocker blocker vs.

  If they are not ads, can you think anyway that they are related to the sites you visit?

  In addition, to close a tab (or window, if there is only one tab), you can press Ctrl + w. could speed up the process of their release until you find a real solution.

• PANTONE + does not match the previous Pantone spot color chart. I have several customers who are using spot colors in logos etc and now these colors are a mess. Can I get and use the old color for Illustrator books?

  PANTONE + does not match the previous Pantone spot color chart. I have several customers who are using spot colors in logos etc and now these colors are a mess. Can I get and use the old color for Illustrator books?

  Well, the spot color has not changed, but the way they were simulated four-color changed, they now use color management to get to the nearest ink possible task.

  Here is some info:

  https://helpx.Adobe.com/Illustrator/KB/PANTONE-plus.html

• SIP trunk behind a router using NAT

  Hello

  Is it possible to use a SIP trunk to a provider SIP ITSP having the CUBE / router gateway behind a firewall using a NAT?

  Does anyone do this?

  I ask because I'm having problems to make my SIP trunk to work and my router for cube is behind my generic service provider router, which makes the NAT. I just want to rule this out as a problem.

  Has anyone else done this? Or is it really impossible?

  Thank you very much

  Tom

  Hello

  As NAT works fine SIP would work properly as the Protocol.

  Here is the RFC for "NAT Traversal practices for Client - Server SIP"

  https://Tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6314

  HTH

  JB

• PPTP to NAT

  I have a client wanting to allow PPTP entering the internal network of teapot. They perform NAT on a 1751 with IOS 12.2 and have a single public IP address. They use static NAT entries to allow incoming SMTP and Terminal Server services. Static NAT entries do not support the Protocol 47 (GRE) so we can not do it this way. What are the options should they do otherwise? I think they'll have to get another public IP address and translate all incoming traffic to this Ip address to the internal IP address where PPTP ends. Who will work and can they have several external users of VPN connecting to the IP address of the internal network only via NAT? Thanks in advance.

  The only way to do it is to get a second IP address, then set up a static translation one for her and that all your users connect to this static IP address. Yes, multiple users can connect to this IP address, no problem.

  The issue here is, as you said, you cannot map GRE through with just the one, IP addess so they need each other and map all protocols through him with just a standard static NAT translation.

• ESX host has a virtual machine that must be behind a physical firewall

  We have several hosts of ESXi.  Some are standard ver3.5, while others are standard ver4.1.  All guests of stand alone.

  A host ESX ver3.5 has 6 virtual computers assigned to the network port of the single on a vSwitch stand-alone virtual computer group.   This switch has 3 uplinks.

  One of the virtual machines must place the physical while the rest remains in front of the firewall as well as the ESX host firewall.   I am told that this can be done by assigning one of of the uplinks to a subnet that is behind the firewall.  And this is the best way to manage it.   My question is: is it possible?   My experience limited with physical firewall and what knowledge I have of VI3, we would need to create a separate vSwitch to do this and assign the VM to these switches... and that's if the uplink can be assigned to a physical switch that connects to another switch behind the firewall (I think).

  Something doesn't seem quite in here... I'm not sure it will work.

  Sounds good to me. If it is a separate physical switch to connect, then you will need an additional vSwitch. If it's just a separate VLAN you could - depending on your current configuration (VST) - just create a new port with the appropriate VLAN ID configured Group.

  André

• missing feature or bug? -Video NetGroup is not through any firewall/NAT

  I'm developing an application based on video of NetGroup. I observed following

  -Without any NAT/firewall - "NetGroup.post" and audio/video works

  -A single client inside NAT/firewall - works of "NetGroup.post", video and audio DOES NOT work

  -Once manually drill through NAT/firewall (non-application), audio and video has started working. As soon as the hole was closed, both audio and video stops again.

  It seems that NetGroup P2P connections are not perforation of NAT/firewall. If someone from adobe can confirm it's true (or not true). If true, this is a known problem, going to be fixed soon? If this isn't the case, I might have to implement a hole punching algorithm in my application.

  Information / help is appreciated.

  RTMFP groups don't traversal of NAT/firewall.  the underlying connections between peers are RTMFP sessions.

  NetGroup.post and P2P multicast use exactly the same RTMFP sessions between peers.  It is not possible that NetGroup.post could work but P2P multicast audio and video would not work in the same peer group of same.

  When you say "manually punching holes in NAT/firewall", what do you mean exactly?  the ports used by clients RTMFP is random by NetConnection instance and cannot be predicted.  you block UDP with a firewall, configure you redirection port through of your NAT or you have disabled your NAT entirely?

  GroupSpecifier what are the parameters that you use for the case where NetGroup.post works for you?  What about the NetStream where P2P multicast does not work?  is this the same group?

• Speed limit on BVI Interface (ASR9001) - several customers

  Hello world

  I was wondering if someone might be able to shed light on what I'm missing to get the following upward and running for one of our customers.

  Scenario: Customer has an ASR9001-S, that makes all the routing as the basis for their internet business customers and they are trying to evaluate limit each client to their respective SLAS. All clients belong to a single instance BVI (BVI200) for example which has a configured 25. Each customer will receive 1-3 25 addresses.

  Ideally, I would have a BVI for each customer, but unfortunately, this is not possible with their IPv4 currently the allowance which is the reason why he's built in this way.

  I was thinking about the following, but I got some errors when I apply the strategy of service for the British Virgin Islands.

  Comment by Customer_A-v4_10Mbps-list of access IPv4 * IPv4 client A 10 Mbps symmetrical Service *.
  Access Customer_A-v4_10Mbps IPv4-list allow ipv4 a.b.c.d/32 one
  !
  Comment of Customer_A-v6_10Mbps-IPv6 access list * customer A IPv6 10Mbits/s symmetric Service *.
  IPv6 Customer_B-v6_10Mbps allowed x ipv6 access list: x: x: x: / 64
  !
  Comment by Customer_B-v4_20Mbps-IPv4 access list * client B IPv4 20Mbps symmetrical Service *.
  IPv4-Customer_B-v4_20Mbps access list allow ipv4 e.f.h.i/32 one
  !
  Comment by Customer_B-v6_20Mbps-IPv6 access list * client B IPv6 20Mbps symmetrical Service *.
  IPv6 Customer_B-v6_20Mbps allowed x ipv6 access list: x: x: x: / 64
  !

  class-map correspondence-everything Customer_B_10Mbps
  game group-access ipv4 Customer_B-v4_10Mbps
  ipv6 Customer_B-v6_10Mbps group-access game
  end-class-map
  !
  class-map correspondence-everything Customer_B_20Mbps
  game group-access ipv4 Customer_B-v4_20Mbps
  ipv6 Customer_B-v6_20Mbps group-access game
  end-class-map
  !

  Policy-map Business_Internet
  class Customer_A_10Mbps
  form average 10 Mbps
  10 Mbps bandwidth
  !
  class Customer_B_20Mbps
  form average 20 Mbps
  20 Mbps bandwidth
  !
  class class by default
  form average 5 Mbps
  bandwidth 5 Mbit/s
  !

  I also tried to create with a parent/child policy-map, but I get the same errors listed below:

  interface BVI200
  service-policy output Business_Internet
  !! QoS-% "ea" detected the condition 'Warning' "actions of queues are not supported on virtual interface BVI/GRE"
  !

  interface BVI200
  Business_Internet of service-policy input
  !! QoS-% "ea" detected the 'Warning' status ' characteristics of queues of penetration is not supported on this card online.
  !

  A that someone does something similar to this. Unfortunately, this will be a dynamic policy-map that will grow/shrink as clients are added/removed.

  I am also looking to apply the formatting on the client side port, however there will be some cases where this is not possible due to multiple clients of services by a switch single demarc...

  Thoughts/Comments/Suggestions.

  Thank you.

  -Dominique

  Hi Dominique,.

  have you tried with the police instead of formatting? Shaping on BVI intf is not supported.

  I remember that we tried to do some police on a Trident LC services and it was not taken in charge, as the Typhoon. ASR9001-S has Typhoon HW (Enhanced Ethernet line card) until now I know.

  You can also try this link. I remember that we had to use qos-group even on ME3600 due to some HW limitations.

  http://www.Cisco.com/c/en/us/TD/docs/routers/asr9000/software/asr9k_r5-2...

  ' Queuing can be done by marking the qos-Group, then by adding a policy to the interface that corresponds to the qos-Group. "

• Several errors related to the firewall w / Windows 7 error - error 1075 - 0 x 80070433.

  I tried for a few hours now to get my firewall works properly. I have already installed Norton, I've heard can cause some problems. I uninstalled Norton and all other my computer protection products. I also used the tool Windows Update FIX IT and FIX IT Firewall tool. None of this has helped to solve the problem. After going through a few threads, I even tried to copy some of the executable code to update the registry. At this point, I haven't met any other ideas on how to solve this problem. Can someone help me?

  Hi Tonyp,

  If you haven't tried, please uninstall Norton anti-virus using the Norton removal tool and check if this solves the problem.

  https://support.Norton.com/SP/en/us/home/current/solutions/kb20080710133834EN_EndUserProfile_en_us

  If the problem persists, please refer to the steps suggested in the following link and check if this solves the problem.

  http://answers.Microsoft.com/en-us/Windows/Forum/Windows_7-security/unable-to-turn-on-firewall-receiving-error/6535cae0-5583-4CD6-B673-584a962d1bac

  Important: Follow the steps in this section carefully. Serious problems can occur if you modify the registry incorrectly. Before you modify it, Save the registry restore problems.

  Hope that the information provided is useful. Do not respond if you need more help.

• Not able to reach several customers 256 amendments

  Hello

  We must with the controller wireless CISCO 2125 with 8 amendments LWAP 1252, including AP get the IP address of windows DHCPserver (172.29.70.0/23), when clients reached 256 amendments to the controller, so also not able to join the wireless network.

  Class provider DHCP or user class will solve this problem. PL guide me.

  Thank you

  Knockaert

  Hi Karthik,

  the 2125 only supports max 256 clients. And anyway this amount of customers on 8 APs is already much too.

  Do you mean that no more customers can join after that? or no APs more can join the WLC?

  Nicolas

  ===

  Remember responses of the rate that you find useful

• Cannot access the VPN server located behind the corporate firewall.

  The VPN server was created by myself, in my Department. I can access the server from anywhere when I am in my business network. When I'm at home, I can't even ping the VPN server WAN interface. When I try to connect via the cisco VPN client, I get the message ' reason 412: peer remote not responding. "

  The main my company firewall blocks external traffic?

  Should I change anything in the VPN server?

  I heard about port forwarding, but have no knowledge about this. Port forwarding is done on the VPN server or the main firewall?

  Also should I go and ask the company system administrator to enable certain ports for the public IP address that I use for my server?

  I hope you can help

  Concerning

  Yes, quite correct. Please open ESP protocol UDP/500 and UDP/4500 for IPSec VPN.

• Using Cisco Client to site VPN on a behind a NAT ASA 5520

  I apologize if this has been asked and we answered in the forums.  I looked, and while I found a large number of entries that were dancing all around this question, I never found nothing which addressed this specific issue.   We currently use an ASA 5520 as the head end of a relatively large customer to site IPSEC VPN (approximately 240 users, not consecutively).   This ASA is currently sitting behind a Checkpoint firewall with a real publicly addressable IP address on its public interface.  All of our customers use the legacy Cisco VPN (not the one anyconnect) client.  We plan to a few controllers F5 link set up between ISPS and firewalls.   For VPN connectivity F5 recommends that we NAT IP address (called a broad IP) to point back to a private IP address on the ASA and F5.  My question is, will this work?   I've always heard say that the head of line needed to have a public IP address on this subject because this is what will be placed in packages for the client to respond to.

  For further information, here's what we have now and what we are invited to attend.

  Current

  ISP - router - firewall-fire - ASA (public IP address as endpoint)

  Proposed

  ISP - router - F5 (public IP address as endpoint using a NAT to ASA) - Firewall - ASA (10.X.X.X as its external interface)

  Proposed alternative

  ISP - router - F5 (public IP address as endpoint using a NAT to ASA) - ASA (10.X.X.X as its external interface)

  All thoughts at this moment would be greatly appreciated.   Thank you!

  Hello

  If there is a static NAT one by one on F5 to the external interface of the ASA, then I don't think they would be any problems.
  Because when the client will attempt to connect to IKE to the translated public IP, F5 will redirect the request to ASA outside interface that is configured for the VPN.

  In addition, to ensure the udp500, 4500 and esp is allowed and then you should be good to go.

  HTH

  Concerning
  Mohit

• Several outbound VPN connections behind PIX-515E

  I will take a PIX-515E off-site for a provision of access internet location. I have several people behind this PIX, who will have to return to the same Office VPN. One person can VPN through the PIX very well, but if someone else tries to VPN they cannot. Once the first person has disconnected for 10 minutes, then the next person can connect. I activated the NAT - T and added fixup protocol esp-ike. What can I do it wrong? Thank you.

  fixup protocol esp-ike - allows PAT to (ESP), one tunnel.

  Please remove this correction.

  If the remote site has NAT - T enabled, then you should be able to use NAT - T and more than 1 user should be able to use behind the PIX VPN client.

  See you soon

  Gilbert

• DMVPN router behind a firewall

  Hi all

  I would like to know if the router DMVPN works behind a virtual firewall.

  We use ISR routers

  ISR router (spoke)--> virtual firewall--> WAN<-- isr="">

  Please notify

  HIII Jocelyn

  Nice to meet you here also...

  Yes, you are right. all you have to do is open the ports for traffic dmvpn. and also the NAT if the firewall is also performing NAT.