Search Results

Search found 249 results on 10 pages for 'asa baylus'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 8/10 | < Previous Page | 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  | Next Page >

  • Server 2003 and XP Client; Why are HTTP connections being silently dropped.

    - by Asa Yeamans
    On my network, my edge-router, a windows 2003 r2 server router with all the latest updates, will drop packets, but only under specific circumstances. I have troubleshot and isolated it down to the most simple configuration i can. There is NO NAT involved. Only fully-public IP addresses. No Firewalls are running either, all ahve been disabled. no packet filters on any interfaces anywhere either. I have a single Windows XP virtual machine and my edge-router(the windows 2003 r2 server, and also a virtual machine) running on a windows 2008 x64 r2 system (running virtual server 2005 as i dont have Intel-VT compatible chip yet). The edge router can access any external http site just fine, no issues. However the windows XP machine is only able to access certain sites. These work: www.google.com www.txstate.edu www.workintexas.com www.thedailywtf.com . These Dont: www.yahoo.com www.utexas.edu en.wikipedia.org slashdot.org www.bing.com. I have removed all possibility of DNS issues by connecting with net-cat from the XP box and sending GET /\r\nHost: \r\n\r\n and that connection replicates the issue as well. The network setup: My statically assigned IP block: x.x.x.168/29 DSL Modem -----PPPoE Connection---- x.x.x.169[EdgeRouter] [EdgeRouter]x.x.x.170 -----Virtual Ethernet----- x.x.x.174 [Test2] Test2's Default gateway is x.x.x.170 and test2 can ping any and every valid, accessible, public IP address with no packet loss what-so-ever. If i connect directly over PPPoE from test2 (the XP box) everything works just fine... Im at my wits end, i have NO IDEA whats causing this.

    Read the article

  • Windows Server 2008 constantly spamming external IP's on outbound TCP port 445

    - by RSXAdmin
    Hi Server Fault, I have a Windows Server 2008 box running as a Domain Controller. I have noticed in my Cisco ASA firewall logs that this box is continuously sending out (like a thousand requests a second) requests on TCP port 445 to external hosts. I have made an effort to deny this outbound traffic from getting on the internet (using the ASA), however I would like these requests to stop from even occurring at all. I have tried disabling TCP/IP over NetBIOS. I have even turned on Windows Advanced Firewall on the box itself to block outbound 445 but the ASA still detects this particular traffic hitting it. I have other DC's and similar type boxes which are not behaving the same way as this box. Is this normal? Is there a way to stop this spamming? Have I been infected? Thank you universe.

    Read the article

  • How to remove duplication from RSpec

    - by Asa
    context "answer is correct" do before(:each) do @answer = stub_model(Answer, :correct => true).as_new_record assigns[:answer] = @answer render "answers/summarize" end it "should display flashcard context properly" do response.should contain("Quiz") end it "should summarize results" do response.should contain("is correct") end end context "answer is incorrect" do before(:each) do @answer = stub_model(Answer, :correct => false).as_new_record assigns[:answer] = @answer render "answers/summarize" end it "should display flashcard context properly" do response.should contain("Quiz") end it "should summarize results" do response.should contain("is incorrect") end end How do I avoid repeating the following block within both of the above contexts? it "should display flashcard context properly" do response.should contain("Quiz") end

    Read the article

  • Cisco Routing through VPN

    - by Superman
    I am looking for a way to allow a client Win7 computer, which connects to our California office's Cisco ASA 5510 over an IPSec VPN connection to then be able to connect to a computer in our chicago office which is itself connected through another Cisco ASA router to california. It appears that we are unable to route client vpn connections between each other, and I cannot find any guidance on how to enable this. Let me know if this is possible / what needs to be done.

    Read the article

  • EasyVPN client Access mutiple subnet behind cisco 5510

    - by zatrac
    I need help with the following scenario Main network ASA 5510 (one inside 192.168.10.1 connection and one outside connection). This ASA 5510 connect to switch 3570 with 3 VLANS configured (192.168.10.0, 10.10.11.0, 10.10.12.0). On the remote site I have ASA5505 ( 10.10.13.0) connected to this ASA5510 through EZVPN, but all it can see is the 192.168.10.0 subnet. What do I need to do to get the subnet 10.10.13.0 to see all 3 internal subnets.

    Read the article

  • Simplest DNS solution for remote offices

    - by dunxd
    I look after a bunch of remote offices that connect via VPN - a Cisco ASA 5505 in each office acts as Firewall and VPN end point. Beyond that we keep things as simple as possible in the offices to minimise the support burden. We don't have any kind of server except in offices large enough to justify having someone dedicated to IT. Basically there is the ASA, some computers, a network printer and a switch. One of the problems I am seeing in a lot of offices is that DNS requests looking up hosts inside our network often fail - I'm assuming timeouts due to the offices internet connection (they are all in developing world countries) having some sub-optimal qualities (e.g. high latency caused by VSAT segments, or packet loss. The obvious solution to this is to have some sort of local DNS service that can serve local requests - so I think it would need to do zone transfers from our Microsoft Windows 2008 R2 DNS servers at HQ. However, simply installing Windows Servers in each office is both expensive, and creates a support burden. This got me thinking about pfsense/m0n0wall on embedded devices - those can act as a DNS server, and could be configured at HQ and sent out as just something that needs to be plugged into the network and can then be forgotten about by the staff locally. Maybe there are some alternatives to the ASA 5505 that include some DNS functionality. Has anyone here dealt with the problem, either using some kind of embedded device, or found some other solution? Any gotchas or reasons to avoid what I have suggested?

    Read the article

  • Network config / gear question

    - by mcgee1234
    I have been tasked with setting up a fairly straightforward rack in a data center (we do not even need a whole rack, but this is the smallest allotment available). In a nutshell, 4 to 6 servers need to be able to reach 2 (maybe 3) vendors. The servers needs to be reachable over the internet. A little more detail - the networks the servers need to reach are inside of the data center, and are "trusted". Connections to these networks will be achieved through intra data center cross connects. It is kind of like a manufacturing line where we receive data from one vendor (burst-able up to 200 Mbits), churn through it on the servers, and then send out data to another vendor (bursts up to 20 Mbits). This series of events is very latency sensitive, so much so that it is common practice not to use NAT or a firewall on these segments (or so I hear). To reach the servers over the internet, I plan to use a site to site VPN. (This part is only relevant as far as hardware selection goes). I have 2 configurations in mind: Cisco 2911 (2921) (with the additional wan ports module) and a layer 2 switch - in this scenario, I would use the router also for VPN. Cisco 3560 layer 3 switch to interconnect the networks inside of the data center and an ASA 5510 (which is total overkill, but the 5505 is not rack mountable) as a firewall for the Wan side (internet) and VPN. I envision the setup to be as follows: Internet - ASA - 3560 Vendors - 3560 - Servers The general idea is that the ASA acts as a firewall and VPN device and the 3560 does all the heavy lifting. The first is a fairly traditional setup but my concern is performance. The second is somewhat unorthodox in that the vendors are directly connected to the layer 3 switch without passing through a firewall. Based on my understanding however, a layer 3 switch will perform substantially better as it will do hardware (ASIC) vs. software switching. (Note that number 2 is a little over the budget, but not unworkable (double negative, ugh)) Since this is my first time dealing with a data center, I am not sure what the IP space is going to look like. I suspect I will retain a block(s) of public IPs, vlan them to individual interfaces for the vendor connections and the servers (which will not reachable from the wan side of course) and setup routing on the switch. So here are my questionss: Is there a substantial performance difference between 1 and 2, i.e. hardware based switching on a layer 3 vs a software base on the 2911? I have trolled the internet and found a lot of Cisco literature, but nothing that I could really use to get a good handle. The vendors we connect to are secure and trusted (famous last words) and as I understand it, it is common practice not to NAT or firewall these connections (because of the aforementioned latency sensitivity). But what what kind of latency are we really talking about if I push the data through a router (or even ASA for that matter)? For our purposes, 5 ms will not kill us, 20 or 30 can be very costly. Others measure in microseconds, but they are out of our league. Is there any issues with using public IPs on a layer 3 switch? I am certainly not married to either of these configs, and I am totally open to any ideas. My knowledge (and I use the term loosely) is largely from books so I welcome any advice / insight. Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • Managed hosting firewall vs managing own firewall

    - by ddawber
    I posted on stackoverflow as to the overall benefits of managed hosting vs non-managed hosting. The more I think about it, it seems to boil down to one question: should I use a managed host because they take care of the firewall, or would I be okay managing my own, software firewall? The sites on the box do get quite a lot of traffic but as for throughput and what-not, it's not something I know much about. Ideally, i'd take my sites over to a Linode stack and manage incoming connections using iptables or an alternative. Here are some example hardware solutions a managed host would provide: Cisco Pix 501, Pix 506, Pix 515 and ASA 5505 and ASA 5510 Firewalls, configurable in a control panel the likes of an enterprise firewall such as FortiGate 110C Aside from this, I do not need managed hosting, so I appreciate your suggestions.

    Read the article

  • Survey: Your Plans for Adopting New Firefox Releases?

    - by Steven Chan (Oracle Development)
    Mozilla is committing to releasing new Firefox versions every six weeks.  Mozilla released Firefox 5 this week.  With this release, Mozilla states that Firefox 4 is End-of-Life and will not receive any additional security updates.  In a comment thread posted on to a Mike Kaply's blog article discussing these new Firefox policies, Asa Dotzler from Mozilla stated: ... Enterprise has never been (and I’ll argue, shouldn’t be) a focus of ours. Until we run out of people who don’t have sysadmins and enterprise deployment teams looking out for them, I can’t imagine why we’d focus at all on the kinds of environments you care so much about.  In a later comment, he added: ... A minute spent making a corporate user happy can better be spent making many regular users happy. I’d much rather Mozilla spending its limited resources looking out for the billions of users that don’t have enterprise support systems already taking care of them. Asa then confirmed that every new Firefox release will put the previous one into End-of-Life: As for John’s concern, “By the time I validate Firefox 5, what guarantee would I have that Firefox 5 won’t go EOL when Firefox 6 is released?” He has the opposite of guarantees that won’t happen. He has my promise that it will happen. Firefox 6 will be the EOL of Firefox 5. And Firefox 7 will be the EOL for Firefox 6.  He added: “You’re basically saying you don’t care about corporations.” Yes, I’m basically saying that I don’t care about making Firefox enterprise friendly. Kev Needham, Channel Manager at Mozilla later stated to PC Mag: The Web and Web browsers continue to evolve rapidly. Mozilla's focus is on providing users with the best Web experience possible, and Firefox needs to evolve at the pace the Web's users and developers expect. By releasing small, focused updates more often, we are able to deliver improved security and stability even as we introduce new features, which is better for our users, and for the Web.We recognize that this shift may not be compatible with a large organization's IT Policy and understand that it is challenging to organizations that have effort-intensive certification polices. However, our development process is geared toward delivering products that support the Web as it is today, while innovating and building future Web capabilities. Tying Firefox product development to an organizational process we do not control would make it difficult for us to continue to innovate for our users and the betterment of the Web.  Your feedback needed for E-Business Suite certifications  Mozilla's new support policy has significant implications for enterprise users of Firefox with Oracle E-Business Suite.  We are reviewing the implications for our certification and support policies for Firefox now.  It would be very helpful if you could let me know about your organisation's plans for Firefox in light of this new information.  Please feel free to drop me a private email, or post a comment here if that's appropriate. 

    Read the article

  • File transfer problems through VPN when Cisco IPS is enabled

    - by Richard West
    We have a Cisco ASA 5510 firewall with the IPS module installed. We have a customer that we must connect to via VPN to their network to exchange files via FTP. We use the Cisco VPN client (version 5.0.01.0600) on our local workstations, which are behind the firewall and subject to the IPS. The VPN client is successful in connecting to the remote site. However when we start the FTP file transfer we are able to upload only 150K to 200K of data, then everything stops. A minute later the VPN session is dropped. I think I have isolated this to an IPS issue by temporarily disabling the Service Policy on the ASA for the IPS with the following command: access-list IPS line 1 extended permit ip 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 inactive After this command was issued I then established the VPN to the remote site and was successful in transferring the entire file. While still connected to the VPN and FTP session I issued the command to enable the IPS: access-list IPS line 1 extended permit ip 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 The file transfer was tried again and was once again successful so I closed the FTP session and reopened it, while keeping the same VPN session open. This file transfer was also successful. This told me that nothing with the FTP programs was being filtered or causing the problem. Furthermore, we use FTP to exchange files with many sites everyday without issue. I then disconnected the original VPN session, which was established when the access-list was inactive, and reconnected the VPN session, now with the access-list active. After starting the FTP transfer the file stopped after 150K. To me this seems like the IPS is blocking, or somehow interfering with the initial VPN setup to the remote site. This only started happening last week after the latest IPS signature updates were applied (sig version 407.0). Our previous sig version was 95 days old becuase the system was not auto updating itself. Any ideas on what could be causing this problem?

    Read the article

  • Site to Site VPN with Fault Tolerence

    - by Nordberg
    Hello, I have a situation where I require an IPSEC tunnel between two sites. Site 2 is a small branch office with basic (ADSL) connectivity and Site 1 is the "main" office with SDSL and ADSL for redundancy should the SDSL fail. From Site 1, all traffic bound for the 172.0.0.0 network will then be sent down another IPSEC tunnel to a supplier's Remote Server. See this page for the basic premise (this is a rough idea and things can be moved about etc...) I am considering specifying Cisco ASA devices as the firewalls for both sites for all connections. Would it be possible to employ something like HSRC to provide a backup at Site 1 should the SDSL go down? I suppose the key aims here are that Site 2 can somehow failover to initiate a VPN to the ASA behind the ADSL at Site 1. I will have a 21 subnet mask on all internet connections so can play with Class C routing if need be... If I'm barking up the wrong tree with HSRC, is there another way I can acheive this without massive expenditure on Barracuda routers et al? Many Thanks.

    Read the article

  • HP Procurve Issue Passing Multiple VLANs over a link

    - by MichaelRwat
    Just to start off with I am a Cisco guy that got placed into an HP project. Basic topology overview from outside in: ASA 5505 with two Ethernet connections to a 2910-24 port switch. This switch is then (Cisco Trunking) to a 2626 switch passing vlan (1 untagged and 100 tagged)between them. I created SVI's on each of the switches for both VLAN's for testing purposes. I can not get vlan 100 to pass across this link. I also have trunks configured to AP's off of the switch and can not ping the vlan 100 BVI on the AP's but can reach the vlan 1 BVI. Port 25 on Access layer (2626) connects (trunks) with port A1 of 2610. STP is not running at all on any switch (this is not my network I can't change this nor did I design this) Distribution Sw: MP1-0# show run ip default-gateway 10.100.100.100 vlan 1 name "DATA" untagged 1-22,24-A1,B1 ip address 10.100.100.6 255.255.255.0 no untagged 23 exit vlan 100 name "GUEST" untagged 23 tagged 24-A1 ip address 10.100.102.6 255.255.255.0 exit Access Sw: ip default-gateway 10.100.100.100 vlan 1 name "DEFAULT_VLAN" untagged 1-26 ip address 10.100.100.5 255.255.255.0 exit vlan 100 name "GUEST" ip address 10.100.102.5 255.255.255.0 tagged 15,25 exitt From the ASA I can ping the vlan 100 address of the 2610 but not the 2626 (10.100.102.6)[Not passing the "trunk"] If I plug into an access port vlan 100 of the 2626 I can ping the SVI for vlan 100 as intended. I can not ping across the "trunk" over vlan 100 but I can across vlan 1. There may be something obvious I'm missing but please review my configuration and thank you for the assistance.

    Read the article

  • DNS issue for internal website routing internet connection from remote location

    - by Michael Paul
    I have an issue that I could use some help with. Our company has a main location and a remote location. Previously, the remote location was connected to the main location through an internet connection VPN tunnel. The connection was pitifully slow at 1.5Mbps, so we upgraded it with a 75Mbps direct link. That meant the remote location lost it's internet access, so we routed their access through the main office internet connection. Everything works perfect except for one thing. The website we host is not accessible from the remote location unless the IP address is used. If I do NSLOOKUP on our website address from a machine connected to the main location network, it resolves correctly to the inside IP address. However, if I do the same from a remote location machine, it resolves to the website's outside IP address. Our internal DNS server(s) have a pointer and CNAME records set up, and everything was working perfectly before the connection was upgraded. In addition, the remote location has a domain controller, DNS server and DHCP server to service these requests at the remote location and prevent these requests from getting routed back and forth over the link. So I think was it happening is that for some reason the DNS server at the remote location is not resolving our website name correctly and passing the requests on to the routers, which then push the request out to the internet DNS system. That resolves the name to our external IP. This is purely a DNS issue, everything else works just fine. I am just stumped on this one. Any ideas on how to fix this? Edit: I forgot to mention that at the remote side of the link is a Cisco ASA-5505 and at the main office there is a Cisco ASA-5510. The link is connected between these 2 devices and the routing is handled in the 5510. Thanks, Michael

    Read the article

  • What Device/System to use as a "router on a stick"

    - by Jeff Leyser
    I need to create several distinct VLANs, and provide a way for traffic to move between them. A "router on a stick" approach seems ideal: Internet | Router with Trunking Capability ("router on a stick") * * Trunk between router and switch * Switch with Trunking Capability | | | | | | | | | | | LAN 2 | LAN 4 | | 10.0.2.0/24 | 10.0.4.0/24 | | | | LAN 1 LAN 3 LAN 5 10.0.1.0/24 10.0.3.0/24 10.0.5.0/24 We have trunk-capable Layer-2 switches. The question is what to use as the router on a stick. My choices seem to be: 1) Use an existing Cisco 5505 ASA firewall. It appears the ASA can do the routing, but it's a 100Mbps device, and so seems sub-optimal at best 2) Buy a router. This seems overkill. 3) Buy a Layer-3 switch. Also seems overkill. 4) Use an existing Linux Box as a router 5) Use a new Linux box as a router' 6) Something I'm not thinking of I think either (4) or (5) is my best option, but I'm not sure how to choose between them. I expect the amount of traffic that has to cross the VLANs to be somewhat small, but bursty. How much load does routing add to a CentOS machine?

    Read the article

  • Web Content Filtering

    - by Byron Wilcox
    I have recently bought a Cisco ASA 5505 for my small business, I was initially led to believe this device could do some limited website filtering that we would need. (one list of unrestricted, and a second for email only) Since it has come to my attention that it may not be able to do this what equipment or software will I need to make this happen?

    Read the article

  • RFC 1918 address on open internet?

    - by longneck
    In trying to diagnose a failover problem with my Cisco ASA 5520 firewalls, I ran a traceroute to www.btfl.com and, much to my surprise, some of the hops came back as RFC 1918 addresses. Just to be clear, this host is not behind my firewall and there is no VPN involved. I have to connect across the open internet to get there. How/why is this possible? asa# traceroute www.btfl.com Tracing the route to 157.56.176.94 1 <redacted> 2 <redacted> 3 <redacted> 4 <redacted> 5 nap-edge-04.inet.qwest.net (67.14.29.170) 0 msec 10 msec 10 msec 6 65.122.166.30 0 msec 0 msec 10 msec 7 207.46.34.23 10 msec 0 msec 10 msec 8 * * * 9 207.46.37.235 30 msec 30 msec 50 msec 10 10.22.112.221 30 msec 10.22.112.219 30 msec 10.22.112.223 30 msec 11 10.175.9.193 30 msec 30 msec 10.175.9.67 30 msec 12 100.94.68.79 40 msec 100.94.70.79 30 msec 100.94.71.73 30 msec 13 100.94.80.39 30 msec 100.94.80.205 40 msec 100.94.80.137 40 msec 14 10.215.80.2 30 msec 10.215.68.16 30 msec 10.175.244.2 30 msec 15 * * * 16 * * * 17 * * * and it does the same thing from my FiOS connection at home: C:\>tracert www.btfl.com Tracing route to www.btfl.com [157.56.176.94] over a maximum of 30 hops: 1 1 ms <1 ms <1 ms myrouter.home [192.168.1.1] 2 8 ms 7 ms 8 ms <redacted> 3 10 ms 13 ms 11 ms <redacted> 4 12 ms 10 ms 10 ms ae2-0.TPA01-BB-RTR2.verizon-gni.net [130.81.199.82] 5 16 ms 16 ms 15 ms 0.ae4.XL2.MIA19.ALTER.NET [152.63.8.117] 6 14 ms 16 ms 16 ms 0.xe-11-0-0.GW1.MIA19.ALTER.NET [152.63.85.94] 7 19 ms 16 ms 16 ms microsoft-gw.customer.alter.net [63.65.188.170] 8 27 ms 33 ms * ge-5-3-0-0.ash-64cb-1a.ntwk.msn.net [207.46.46.177] 9 * * * Request timed out. 10 44 ms 43 ms 43 ms 207.46.37.235 11 42 ms 41 ms 40 ms 10.22.112.225 12 42 ms 43 ms 43 ms 10.175.9.1 13 42 ms 41 ms 42 ms 100.94.68.79 14 40 ms 40 ms 41 ms 100.94.80.193 15 * * * Request timed out.

    Read the article

  • Secretara si seful

    - by interesante
    Un bancher discuta cu prietenul sau:- Iti inchipui, m-am indragostit de secretara mea!Ea are 20 de ani, eu 65! Ce crezi, sansele mele vor creste daca ii voi spune ca am 50?- Sansele tale vor creste daca ii vei spune ca ai 80!Vezi si alte chestii haioase pe profilul meu de pe acest siteProprietarul unu hotel era nelamurit la calcularea unei facturi. Se decide sa-si intrebe secretara.- Asa-i ca ai terminat Politehnica?- Da, ii raspunde secretara.- Bun, atunci spune-mi, daca ai avea 20.000 de dolari din care ai scadea 14%, cu ce ai mai ramane?- Cu nimic in afara de cercei!

    Read the article

  • Brief explanation for executables in a GNU/Clang Toolchain?

    - by ZhangChn
    I roughly understand that cc, ld and other parts are called in a certain sequence according to schemes like Makefiles etc. Some of those commands are used to generate those configs and Makefiles. And some other tools are used to deal with libraries. But what are other parts used for? How are they called in this process? Which tool would use various parser generators? Which part is optional? Why? Is there a brief summary get these explained on how the tools in a GNU or LLVM/Clang toolchain are organised and called in a C/C++ project building? Thanks in advance. EDIT: Here is a list of executables for Clang/LLVM on Mac OS X: ar clang dsymutil gperf libtool nmedit rpcgen unwinddump as clang++ dwarfdump gprof lorder otool segedit vgrind asa cmpdylib dyldinfo indent m4 pagestuff size what bison codesign_allocate flex install_name_tool mig ranlib strip yacc c++ ctags flex++ ld mkdep rebase unifdef cc ctf_insert gm4 lex nm redo_prebinding unifdefall

    Read the article

  • Quand Chrome gagne 40 millions d'utilisateurs, Firefox en gagne 100 millions d'après un cadre de Moz

    Mise à jour du 21/05/10 Quand Chrome gagne 40 millions d'utilisateurs, Firefox en gagne 100 D'après un cadre de Mozilla : qui parle de déclin ? Comme d'habitude avec la Fondation Mozilla, il ne s'agit pas d'une réponse officielle. Mais cela y ressemble furieusement. Sur son blog personnel, Asa Dotzler, directeur du développement de Firefox, vient de comparer les progressions respectives de Chrome et de Firefox sur l'année 2009. Cette mini-étude fait suite aux déclarations de Black Ross, un des créateurs du navigateur, pour qui le Panda Roux est proche du déclin et la Fondation empêtrée dans une culture bureaucratique qu...

    Read the article

  • Mozilla ne veut pas délaisser le monde professionnel, un de ses dirigeants assure que Firefox peut répondre aux besoins des entreprises

    Mozilla ne veut pas délaisser le monde professionnel Un de ses vice-présidents assure que Firefox peut répondre aux besoins des entreprises Mise à jour du 29/06/11 Les récentes affirmation de Asa Dotzler sur les relations entre Mozilla et les entreprises ont fait des remous. En écrivant noir sur blanc (cf. ci-avant) que les professionnels n'étaient pas - et ne devraient pas être - une priorité pour le développement de Firefox, plusieurs entreprises ont fait connaître leurs inquiétudes. Parmi elle, IBM, qui a récemment fait le choix de Firefox comme navigateur pour ses centaines de milliers d'employés. Le coeur du problème vient de l'accé...

    Read the article

  • Tunnel is up but cannot ping directly connected network

    - by drmanalo
    We configured a site-to-site VPN and here is the topology. I control the network on the left but not the one on the right. All devices in our network has public IPs. Server---ASA5505---Cisco887======Internet=====ASA5510---devices I can see the tunnel is up and can do extended ping using a loopback interface. From the 10.175 and 10.165 networks, they can also ping my loopback address. I can also dial in using a Cisco VPN client, and can connect to the devices on the right. #show crypto session Crypto session current status Interface: Vlan3 Profile: xxx-profile Session status: UP-ACTIVE Peer: 213.121.x.x port 500 IKEv1 SA: local 77.245.x.x/500 remote 213.121.x.x/500 Active IPSEC FLOW: permit ip 10.0.20.0/255.255.255.240 10.175.0.0/255.255.128.0 Active SAs: 0, origin: crypto map IPSEC FLOW: permit ip 10.0.20.0/255.255.255.240 10.165.0.0/255.255.192.0 Active SAs: 2, origin: crypto map #ping 10.165.29.39 source loopback 2 Type escape sequence to abort. Sending 5, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 10.165.29.39, timeout is 2 seconds: Packet sent with a source address of 10.0.20.1 !!!!! Success rate is 100 percent (5/5), round-trip min/avg/max = 16/17/20 ms My problem is the devices on the right cannot reach my server. They could only ping the loopback address and nothing else. I'm pasting some diagnostics related to routing thinking perhaps routing is my issue. I can paste all the running-config on my side of network if needed. #show ip int brief Interface IP-Address OK? Method Status Protocol ATM0 unassigned YES NVRAM administratively down down Ethernet0 unassigned YES NVRAM administratively down down FastEthernet0 unassigned YES unset up up connected to ASA FastEthernet1 unassigned YES unset administratively down down FastEthernet2 unassigned YES unset administratively down down FastEthernet3 unassigned YES unset up up Loopback1 10.0.20.65 YES NVRAM up up Loopback2 10.0.20.1 YES NVRAM up up Virtual-Template1 77.245.x.x YES unset up down Virtual-Template2 77.245.x.x YES unset up down Vlan1 unassigned YES unset down down Vlan3 77.245.x.x YES NVRAM up up connected to the Internet #show run | section ip route ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 77.245.x.x ip route 213.121.240.36 255.255.255.255 Vlan3 #show access-list Extended IP access list 102 10 permit ip 10.0.20.0 0.0.0.15 10.175.0.0 0.0.127.255 (3332 matches) 20 permit ip 10.0.20.0 0.0.0.15 10.165.0.0 0.0.63.255 (3498 matches) #show vlan-switch VLAN Name Status Ports ---- -------------------------------- --------- ------------------------------- 1 default active 3 VLAN0003 active Fa0, Fa1, Fa2, Fa3 1002 fddi-default act/unsup 1003 token-ring-default act/unsup 1004 fddinet-default act/unsup 1005 trnet-default act/unsup #show ip route Codes: L - local, C - connected, S - static, R - RIP, M - mobile, B - BGP D - EIGRP, EX - EIGRP external, O - OSPF, IA - OSPF inter area N1 - OSPF NSSA external type 1, N2 - OSPF NSSA external type 2 E1 - OSPF external type 1, E2 - OSPF external type 2 i - IS-IS, su - IS-IS summary, L1 - IS-IS level-1, L2 - IS-IS level-2 ia - IS-IS inter area, * - candidate default, U - per-user static route o - ODR, P - periodic downloaded static route, H - NHRP, l - LISP + - replicated route, % - next hop override Gateway of last resort is 77.245.x.x to network 0.0.0.0 S* 0.0.0.0/0 [1/0] via 77.245.x.x 10.0.0.0/8 is variably subnetted, 5 subnets, 3 masks C 10.0.20.0/28 is directly connected, Loopback2 L 10.0.20.1/32 is directly connected, Loopback2 C 10.0.20.64/28 is directly connected, Loopback1 L 10.0.20.65/32 is directly connected, Loopback1 S 10.165.0.0/18 [1/0] via 213.121.x.x 77.0.0.0/8 is variably subnetted, 3 subnets, 3 masks S 77.0.0.0/8 [1/0] via 77.245.x.x C 77.245.x.x/29 is directly connected, Vlan3 L 77.245.x.x/32 is directly connected, Vlan3 213.121.x.0/32 is subnetted, 1 subnets S 213.121.x.x is directly connected, Vlan3 I read some of the posts here which lead to NATing issue but I'not sure of my next step. Should I translate my public address to private and route it to the loopback address? (only guessing) CISCO VPN site to site Site-to-Site VPN between two ASA 5505s only working in one direction Hope someone could help. Thanks in advance!

    Read the article

  • Cisco Anyconnect Issue on HTC HD2

    - by Myles
    Hello, We've just got a HTC HD2 handset through (UK - T-mobile); and we've installed the Cisco Anyconnect client. It connects ok but then after a few seconds disconnects, then reconnects. It then keeps cycling through in this way, and at no point can we even attempt to sync Exchange! Our ASA 5510 reports; Group User IP <149.254.217.2 SVC Message: 17/ERROR: Reconnecting to recover from error.. And from the phone log; 10:56:03Debug Function: CSocketTransport::getTransportMTU File: ..\IPC\SocketTransport.cpp Line: 1058 Invoked Function: CNetInterface::GetTcpIpMTU Return Code: -32571377 (0xFE0F000F) Description: NETINTERFACE_ERROR_INTERFACE_NOT_AVAILABLE Does anyone have any advice on why it's constantly disconnecting? The phone log does suggest a lack of service; but the phone can browse the net, make calls, etc and appears to have good signal throughout. We did try the Anyconnect software on a Windows 7 PC which worked fine, no drop outs. Any help would be greatly appreciated! Thank you, Myles

    Read the article

  • 64-bit Cisco VPN client (IPsec) ?

    - by mika
    Cisco VPN client (IPsec) does not support 64bit Windows. Worse, Cisco does not even plan to release a 64-bit version, instead they say that "For x64 (64-bit) Windows support, you must utilize Cisco's next-generation Cisco AnyConnect VPN Client." Cisco VPN Client Introduction Cisco VPN Client FAQ But SSL VPN licences cost extra. For example, most new ASA firewalls come with plenty of IPSec VPN licences but only a few SSL VPN licences. What alternatives do you have for 64-bit Windows? So far, I know two: 32-bit Cisco VPN Client on a virtual machine NCP Secure Entry Client on 64-bit Windows Any other suggestions or experiences? -mika-

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  | Next Page >