[SRP527w] NAT Traversal unavailable options VPN!

Similar Questions

• NAT Traversal on site to site VPN pix

  I don't think it's possible to implement NAT traversal between a site to IPSEC VPN using ESP tunnels?

  Our ISP to the remote end will provide only a public IP address and which is attributed to their router...

  Sites are using pre-shared keys and IKE

  for example...

  LAN-PIX1-ISPROUTER-INTERNET-ISPPATROUTER-PIX2-LAN

  I have attached the card encryption for more info

  Thanks in advance...

  I guess that NAT - T is most commonly used in a customer VPN environment, but I'm sure that its not limited to this type of connection.

  I just set up a VPN this morning with the help of a customer on a router running 12.2.15T and tested connection with NAT - T works very well by using IP addresses.

  NAT - T enabled by a NAT detection process, and there is that to protect the ESP of a change should work in both environments.

  I'll have a go in my lab, see if I can implement and check it.

  However by going to the original post, you say that only one address is available from the ISP, it is on the router for pix link?

  Where are the limits of NAT, I expect to be in the PIX, but it must be a public IP address on you interfaces also. You can then use the external address as endpoints IPSec, don't need NAT - T in any case.

• Design site to Site VPN w/NAT traversal issue

  Hi, I have a number of site to site VPN that end on a PIX. I intend to migrate these VPN to a router that sits on a demilitarized zone connected to the PIX. Before doing that I'm going to set up a private network new virtual to end on the router but I also need than VPNS that end on the PIX to be not affected.

  If I configure NAT traversal on the PIX, affected my other VPN?

  Thanks in advance

  DOM

  Hi Dom,

  Why do you want to configure NAT-Traversal on PIX, if you wish to terminate your VPN router (which is on the DMZ).

  Do you do any NAT on PIX thru the router?

  If you want to configure NAT-Traversal, it must be configured on the end (on the router in your case) devices.

  Example:

  When a user with Cisco client or Cisco router behind NAT wants to connect to another device (such as PIX, ASA, or router) NAT - T must be configured on the machine (which will be the PIX or ASA)

  Hope that helps.

  * Please indicate the post

• ASA 5505 - crypto isakmp nat-traversal is missing?

  I can't understand it. I have an ASA5505 at home that I use for VPN access. Sometimes when I connect I can't ping anything. I check the config and it shows:

  No encryption isakmp nat-traversal

  I have configured "crypto isakmp nat-traversal" so many times before, and somehow it is still deleted. Seems to happen at random, as well as when the device is restarted. (Yes, the config has been saved). I would say that what is happening at least 2 - 3 times a week.

  Any ideas? I am running the 8.0.2 version code.

  This is a bug. Set the value on something other than the default value of 20. This will fix the problem.

  Cryto isakmp nat-traversal 21

• NAT traversal broken after upgrade to 7.04

  We had the work of nat crossing very well on our PIX

  Bundle of 515e run worm 6.3.4

  For ah, esp, iskmp, in the port udp 500.

  crossing of nat enabled. Sysopt permit-ipsec.

  behind the pix, users can estrablish vpn connections, but traffic does not pass. users can establish vpn & pass traffic very well when they are in front of the pix. Users connect to different devices vpn as we have no control or access to

  Hi Eric,.

  If I understand correctly, the error only occurs for users behind your pix for an upgrade to 704?

  Check if the following statements are present in your pix config:

  ISAKMP nat-traversal 20

  ISAKMP ipsec-over-tcp port 10000

  ISAKMP allows outside

  Also, the error can occur because of some missing list access for users behind the pix.

  HTH

  Mike

• "no nat-traversal crypto isakmp" after restart

  Hello

  With the version of the Software ASA 8.0, we noticed that whenever restart us tha device, the configuration line:

  No encryption isakmp nat-traversal

  appears in the configuration.

  It is very annoying, because this NAT - T obviously does not work.

  Any of you noticed that too?

  Ideas?

  Thank you very much.

  Marco Pizzi.

  Hi Marco,.

  This is a bug in the version of the ASA 8.x software and there are workarounds:

  CSCsj52581 Details of bug

  No inconsistent configuration of nat-traversal isakmp crypto after reboot

  Symptom:

  After a restart of the ASA at the global order "no isakmp encryption".

  NAT-traversal.

  appears in the running-config even it is not available in the

  startup-config.

  Conditions:

  None

  Steps to reproduce:

  BSNs-ASA5505-1 (config) # nat-traversal crypto isakmp

  BSNs-ASA5505-1 (config) # copy run start

  BSNs-ASA5505-1 (config) # sh run all | NAT Inc

  Crypto isakmp nat-traversal 20

  BSNs-ASA5505-1 (config) # sh start | NAT Inc

  BSNs-ASA5505-1 (config) #.

  After reloading of the ASA:

  BSNs-asa5505-1 # sh run all | NAT Inc

  No encryption isakmp nat-traversal

  BSNs-asa5505-1 # sh start | NAT Inc

  asa5505-BSNs-1 #.

  Workaround solution:

  (1) use a default value, for example, "crypto isakmp nat-traversal 21.

  (2) to activate the "crypto isakmp nat-traversal" after the restart of the ASA if you

  You can use the default value. The default value is: crypto isakmp

  NAT-traversal 20

  Radim

• Ports VPN Client NAT Traversal

  I need to allow access to the PC Firewall etc making PAT running VPN client to a PIX running 6.3 - what ports/protocols should be opened on the firewall etc? As far as I know, it will be UDP port 500 and TCP port 10000 (or all that will be configured on the client). The network will look like this:

  Customer - etc - PIX - Server

  Hello

  they would be:

  UDP 500

  UDP 4500 (NAT - T)

  no need for the tcp port, pix 6.3.1 manages not ipsec/tcp, its only ipsec/udp.

  THX

  AFAQ

• Static and NAT router to router VPN

  Hello

  I have two site VPN using routers. The VPN is fine, BUT - at the end of the seat, the customer has NAT entries static to allow incoming connections - any service that has a NAT static to allow incoming connections from the Internet is inaccessible in the same way. Ping, for example, doesn't have this problem because there is no static NAT entry. I tried to configure a route map-"No. - nat" according to the http://www.cisco.com/en/US/partner/tech/tk583/tk372/technologies_configuration_example09186a00800949ef.shtml , I thought I was working.

  H.O. has the IP 131.203.64.0/24 and 135.0.0.0/24 (I know, I know - I'm trying to change), and the R.O. 192.168.1.0/24.

  Bits of configuration:

  IP nat inside source overload map route SHEEP interface Ethernet0

  IP nat inside source static tcp 135.0.0.248 131.203.100.27 3389 3389 extensible

  (other static removed)

  Int-E0-In extended IP access list

  ip permit 192.168.1.0 0.0.0.255 any

  (other entries deleted)

  access-list 198 deny ip 131.203.64.0 0.0.0.255 192.168.1.0 0.0.0.255

  access-list 198 deny ip 135.0.0.0 0.0.0.255 192.168.1.0 0.0.0.255

  access-list 198 allow ip 135.0.0.0 0.0.0.255 any

  SHEEP allowed 10 route map

  corresponds to the IP 198

  1 remove the static entry for the specified host the VPN problem, but obviously breaks things :(

  2. as mentioned, the VPN itself works fine, I can ping hosts perfectly.

  Any help greatly appreciated :)

  Thank you

  Mike.

  You must use the option of the route to the static NAT map. This is a new feature in 12.2 (4) T according to this page:

  http://www.Cisco.com/univercd/CC/TD/doc/product/software/ios123/123cgcr/ipras_r/ip1_i2g.htm#1079180

  He must do exactly what you want. The old, another way to do is use "The thing", where you create a loopback interface and don't make a nat interface and use routing strategy for routing VPN traffic to one address on the same subnet as the loopback interface, but not the address of the loop. IOS then that réacheminera traffic to the real destination (in this case the remote VPN site), but since now it is not a 'ip nat inside' interface, the static nat translations does not apply and the VPN traffic will not be translated. The problem with this solution is that all loopback traffic is switched to the process, so it is a bit of a hack, but these things are sometimes necessary.

  HTH

• NAT exempted for pool vpn in ASDM

  I read everything I can find it, and I think I understand what is asked of me, but I'm not exactly sure how do within the ASDM

  I used the "wizard" to implement the anyconnect VPN and think it's well.

  But the wizard reminded me that I had to add a rule to exempt nat ok then the wizard isn't such a wiz after all and cannot put everything in place.

  My VPN pool is 10.10.35.1 through 50

  My internal networks is 10.10.30.0/24 and 10.10.10.0/24

  Do I need 2 nat rules exempt to allow remote desktop windows for internal machines via AnyConnect?

  and if so, how do I that in ASDM (I'm totally distraught on the use of the CLI, and if that works better, I would like a step by step)

  Thank you

  Dennis

  Hello

  You can insert the following configuration to configure the NAT0 / exempt NAT required

  Note of the INTERIOR-NAT0 NAT0 for VPN access-list

  access list for the INTERIOR-NAT0 allowed ip 10.10.30.0 255.255.255.0 10.10.35.0 255.255.255.0

  the INTERIOR-NAT0 10.10.10.0 ip access list allow 255.255.255.0 10.10.35.0 255.255.255.0

  
  

  NAT (inside) 0-list of access to the INTERIOR-NAT0

  You can use the CLI directly or you can use the ASDM--> tools--> command-line Interface. You can choose the option "several lines" before inserting the commands to send to the ASA.

  Hope this helps

  -Jouni

• NAT, stop communication OSX VPN configuration problem.

  Hello

  It is my first time posting in this forum. I have trouble getting Mac computers (my test is OSX 10.8.2) to correctly connect the VPN to the company. We have a Cisco ASA5510, who manages the VPN applications.  Here are some details:

  -Windows computers, Cisco VPN Client (not Anyconnect) are able to connect to the VPN and access internal/etc file server computers, just as we want to.

  -Mac can establish a VPN connection, but cannot communicate with servers or internal machines. I can't connect to or ping the file server by using its IP address. Also, I can't ping my personal work computer.

  -BUT, from my work computer I CAN ping the ip address of the Mac he receives after connecting via VPN. Thus, internal Windows PC can ping external VPN would be Mac, but Mac cannot ping inner Windows pc.

  ASDM using I was able to run Packet Tracer. I got trace a ping of the machine address Windows 192.168.0.52 23 to address the 192.168.5.33/24 Mac VPN. This succeeded.

  The use of Packet Tracer to trace a ping the address VPN for Mac 192.168.5.33/24 to 192.168.0.52 Windows address 23 is not successful. The package goes through the following phases: 'Capture', 'Access-list', 'looking for route', 'Access-List', 'Options IP', 'Inspect', 'Inspect', 'Debug ICMP","Free of NAT", until it reaches"NAT"where I get this message:

  Menu - NAT Action - type

  Config

  NAT (inside1) 1 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0

  match ip inside1 all inside1 all

  dynamic translation of hen 1 (192.168.1.1 [Interface PAT])

  translate_hits = 913403, untranslate_hits = 27

  The result is that the package is abandoned.

  Info: flow (acl-drop) is denied by the configured rule

  I'm not super familiar with ACL or NAT configuration, so I do not know what changes I need to do to make this work correctly. I find as strange as the windows pc using the customer Cisco have no problem to communicate internally after the connection, but do not have a Mac Mac built-in Cisco IPSEC VPN.

  Any help would be greatly appreciated.

  -Jean-Claude

  P.s. I have included a screenshot of the screen of Packet Tracer.

  Is your home wireless network was in the 192.168.1.0/24 subnet? If this is the case, try to change to a different subnet as you suggested earlier and see if it works.

• Options VPN new Firmware RV320 1.3.1.12

  Hi all

  I just upgraded my RV320 to the 1.3.1.12 firmware version. I noticed that with this new firmware, two new VPN options are available, Flex VPNand OpenVPN . Unfortunately I can't find any documentation on these new options... :-(

  Can someone point me to the documentation?

  Thanks in advance for your prompt response!

  Cheers, b.

  Hello Bernard,.

  Please contact Cisco support community centre.

  I hope you do well. I'm really sorry for the inconvenience caused. Please click Help at the top right of the corresponding page on the RV320 GUI, which will show you the descriptions of each option.

  You can contact our HWC team via chat using the links below:

  https://supportforums.Cisco.com/community/4841/online-chat-support

• NAT on SAA with VPN

  Hello

  I need a VPN setup connection a L2L but don't know how.

  I have a site ASA with network 10.14.14.0/24, and on the other site also an ASA with the 10.14.16.0/24 network.

  I need NAT all traffic from 10.14.14.0/24 and will 10.14.16.0/24 to 10.19.1.15/32.

  Is this possible?

  If yes where can I find examples?

  Thank you and best regards,

  Hello

  It is possible.

  example of Configuration using ASDM:

  -------------------------

  http://www.Cisco.com/en/us/products/ps6120/products_getting_started_guide_chapter09186a0080856cf8.html

  Example of configuration using IOS commands:

  ---------------------------------------

  http://www.Cisco.com/en/us/products/HW/vpndevc/ps2030/products_configuration_example09186a00805734ae.shtml

  -Jaffer

• NAT overlapping with remote VPN access

  Hi all

  My client has an ASA 5510 at the main location. We're shooting for their remote access VPN SSL needs. 30 or so remote users.

  The problem is that the main site has a number of network 192.168.1.0/24. The number of Linksys routers bought on shelf at any store of default.

  Obviously, by default, it does not work. When users connect to the VPN from home, it connects but network resources are not available.

  I read about overlapping NAT with tunnels of site to another, but that all remote access? Is it possible as well?

  Any help to point me in the right direction would be much appreciated.

  Thank you!

  Look at the PIX / ASA 7.x and later: VPN Site to Site (L2L) with the example of setting up IPsec policy NAT (overlapping of private networks) for more information

  http://www.Cisco.com/en/us/products/HW/vpndevc/ps2030/products_configuration_example09186a00808c9950.shtml

• Join Meeting unavailable option and touch screen displays the current meeting.

  Hello

  We had a video-conference in our society, here is the list of endpoints participating in the Conference

  Tandber C60 - TC5.1.3.292001
  Cisco SX20 TP - TC6.3.0.3d8e7d1
  Cisco TP MX 200 - TC6.3.0.3d8e7d1
  Cisco TP MX 300 - TC6.3.0.3d8e7d1

  We have touch panel connected to all the codec above. We noticed that join meeting is sometimes unavailable, and touch screen displays the current meeting.

  Can you please let me know why this problem is intermittent.

  Hi Sandesh,

  If a conference is reserved as booking of TMS, it is expected that the keys 'register' on the endpoints are disabled.

  For more information on how and why reservations from Outlook could be "downgraded" to booking, see page 59 and 60 of the TMSXE Deployment Guide.

  Kind regards
  Kjetil

• NAT overlapping by IPSec VPN

  I followed the instructions on http://cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk583/tk372/technologies_configuration_example09186a00800b07ed.shtml

  and have been able to establish the VPN and through each host ping. I have problems with some of the packets getting dropped. I use low-cost hardware (routers 1812 and 1841) and I wonder if this is the reason why he lost half of my packages. Or is there another reason this is happening. I would like to know if I can impliment QOS on this traffic that must pass from one site to the other. Since 50% of packet losses are unacceptable.

  Joe,

  Depending on the amount of traffic you send through the tunnel, the 1800 series router may or may not be allowed. But, we need to know if the packets are getting lost oversubscription of the link or because the processing power of the router is maxed out.

  Here's the datasheet model 1800 router fixed and the number of performances of IPSEC is 40 Mbps 3DES @ 1400-byte packets.

  http://www.Cisco.com/en/us/products/ps5853/products_data_sheet0900aecd8028a95f.html

  BTW, you could use QOS to prioritize, shape, font, etc. packages but if another network device is down packages, then it won't make a difference and you will always have ignored packets.

  Kind regards

  Arul

  * Please note all useful messages *.