Thanks for the quick response, I'll apply what has been suggested and get back to you.
Dave
Main Topics
Browse All TopicsI have a site with a data network 11.11.11.x and a phone network (Cisco) 10.1.10.x. Users at this site plug a phone into a POE switch and get a 10.1.10.x network. A Pix 501 is providing NAT/VPN/Firewall services on 11.11.11.1 and several VPN connections from Cisco 857 devices terminate here.
The remote networks are 10.2.1.x, 10.2.2.x and 10.2.3.x
The goal is to allow the VPN tunnel to pass voice and data traffic from both networks for remote users.
The VPN's are in place to the networks above and work fine. I am unsure as to route to and from these networks, I have tried adding this IPSec rule allowing the 10.1.10.x network
access-list 102 permit ip 10.2.2.0 0.0.0.255 10.1.10.0 0.0.0.255
Cant figure out how to get the 837 (remote) to route 10.1.10.x traffic over the VPN let alone get a phone to talk to CCM.
I'm sure its simple but can't see the wood for the trees.
Many thanks
This Question has been solved and asker verified All Experts Exchange premium technology solutions are available to subscription members.
Experts Exchange has been collecting answers to technology questions since 1996…3 million and counting! If you have a question, chances are we already have your answer.
If you can't find the exact answer you're looking for, ask our exclusive community of 50,000 experts. You’ll get a personalized answer from a trusted professional.
Thousands of free tech tips, tricks, how-to’s and tutorials are available in our peer reviewed articles section. See for yourself how smart our experts are, no login required.
Access the answers to your technology questions today.
30-day free trial. Register in 60 seconds.
Members of the expert community talk about why the experience at Experts Exchange is different than what you will find anywhere else.

Try it out and discover for yourself.
30-day free trial. Register in 60 seconds.
Join the community of experts here and help other tech pros by answering question in your area of expertise. You can earn FREE access to all Experts Exchange's premium features and resources.
Ok, I have amended ACL's at the 857 end and can ping 10.1.10.252 (second IP assigned to a 11.11.11.0 server for testing traffic flow)
Access list on 857 as follows: (public IP's are 1.1.1.1 to the 11.11.11.0 network, 2.2.2.2 to a separate VPN - 10.2.1.0)
access-list 100 remark --- Outside In ---
access-list 100 remark SDM_ACL Category=17
access-list 100 permit ip 10.1.10.0 0.0.0.255 10.2.2.0 0.0.0.255 log
access-list 100 remark IPSec Rule
access-list 100 permit ip 10.2.1.0 0.0.0.255 10.2.2.0 0.0.0.255
access-list 100 permit udp host 1.1.1.1 any eq non500-isakmp
access-list 100 permit udp host 1.1.1.1 any eq isakmp
access-list 100 permit esp host 1.1.1.1 any
access-list 100 permit ahp host 1.1.1.1 any
access-list 100 permit ip 11.11.11.0 0.0.0.255 10.2.2.0 0.0.0.255
access-list 100 permit udp host 2.2.2.2 any eq non500-isakmp
access-list 100 permit udp host 2.2.2.2 any eq isakmp
access-list 100 permit esp host 2.2.2.2 any
access-list 100 permit ahp host 2.2.2.2 any
access-list 100 permit tcp any any eq 3389
access-list 100 permit tcp any any eq 15555
access-list 100 permit tcp any any eq 554
access-list 100 permit gre any any
access-list 100 permit esp any any
access-list 100 permit tcp any any eq www
access-list 100 permit icmp any any unreachable
access-list 100 permit icmp any any time-exceeded
access-list 100 permit icmp any any echo
access-list 100 deny ip any any
access-list 101 remark --- 11.11.11.0 network ---
access-list 101 permit ip 10.2.2.0 0.0.0.255 11.11.11.0 0.0.0.255
access-list 101 permit ip 10.2.2.0 0.0.0.255 10.1.10.0 0.0.0.255 log
access-list 102 remark --- 10.2.1.0 network ---
access-list 102 permit ip 10.2.2.0 0.0.0.255 10.2.1.0 0.0.0.255
access-list 110 remark --- NAT ---
access-list 110 deny ip 10.2.2.0 0.0.0.255 10.1.10.0 0.0.0.255 log
access-list 110 deny ip 10.2.2.0 0.0.0.255 10.2.1.0 0.0.0.255
access-list 110 deny ip 10.2.2.0 0.0.0.255 11.11.11.0 0.0.0.255
access-list 110 permit ip 10.2.2.0 0.0.0.255 any
access-list 110 deny ip any any
The PIX 501 inside interface is 11.11.11.1 and this is connected to the same PoE switch that talks to the phone system. The PIX does not have a 10.1.10.x inside address.
The 7960 phone now has an IP address and tftp is pointing to 10.1.10.1, just keep getting
Configuring CM List
and then
Opening 10.1.10.1
I can obviously ping the 10.1.10.0 network across the VPN but I don't think it knows where to go to get to the 10.1.10.1 host (CCM).
Any ideas?
Thanks,
Dave
it might be best to put a laptop on the voice vlan at the remote site and do some pings and traces to see where it is failing. the interesting bit about the VPN is that you have to deny the voice traffic as interesting at the remote end, and confiure it as legitimate and routable at the main site. Here are the things to look at.
at the remote site, does traffic destined for the ccm go over the vpn, set up a ping and watch the stats on the vpn tunnel, if it is working the rx and tx will match but if one is growing and the other isn't it will help yo uidentify if it is an access issue or a routing issue.
at the main site can you ccm ping to the voice vllan at the remote site, does it route approriately. try to ping the device on the voice vlan at the remote site from the ccm and watch your counters on both sides, are they both incrimenting or is one side not in one direction.
Thinkng about when is required on both sides should help,
I hope this does.
-t
For some reason, I am unable to ping 10.1.10.1 (CCM) from any machine at the main site. This is possibly by design, not 100% sure as I didn't install the phone system. Below are snippets from the CCM config detailing the ethernet interfaces:
controller E1 0/0/0
pri-group timeslots 1-31
!
class-map match-all L3-to-L2_VoIP-Cntrl
match ip dscp af31
class-map match-all L3-to-L2_VoIP-RTP
match ip dscp ef
!
!
policy-map output-L3-to-L2
class L3-to-L2_VoIP-RTP
set cos 5
class L3-to-L2_VoIP-Cntrl
set cos 3
!
gw-accounting syslog
!
!
!
!
interface GigabitEthernet0/0
description $ETH-LAN$$ETH-SW-LAUNCH$$I
no ip address
no ip mroute-cache
duplex auto
speed auto
!
interface GigabitEthernet0/0.100
encapsulation dot1Q 100
ip address 10.1.10.1 255.255.255.0
no snmp trap link-status
service-policy output output-L3-to-L2
!
interface GigabitEthernet0/0.200
encapsulation dot1Q 200 native
ip address 192.168.1.1 255.255.255.0
no snmp trap link-status
The system as I understand works as follows:
1. Phones work off 10.1.10.0/24 network using TFTP to 10.1.10.1 to download boot file.
2. Stonevoice admin is on 192.168.1.0 network, the phone's DNS server points to this network (192.168.1.15/24 - SBS Server DNS)
3. PC's connect to the 11.11.11.0/24 network but can be plugged into the back of any handset and still get 11.11.11.0/24 DHCP addresses.
4. Remote site (10.2.2.0/24) can now ping 192.168.1.0/24 traffic apart from .1 (internal users can ping)
5. Remote site (10.2.2.0/24) can now ping a dual homed server on 10.1.10.252 but cannot ping 10.1.10.1 (neither can internal users)
Cisco Phone on remote site just waits for CM config.
I think routing is working for 10.1.10.0 and 192.168.1.0 networks over VPN as a tracert shows traffic going directly to specified host.
Bit of a head scratcher!
i think yo uare right about the pixes limitations...
So, ping in the other direction, what happens if you ping from the ccm to the working remote site? compare that with what happens when you ping to the non-working remote site.
if you could include clean versions of the running configs for the routers at the working and non working remote sites as well as the pix i think we can move forward.
Your problem is that you have no route between the router for which you just posted the config and the firewall. You need to add a trunk sub interface to the router, that is on the same subnet as the PIX firewall and set a route to the remote site that points to the PIX on that router.
See we know that traffic from the remote is getting to the 10.1.10.x subnet. The issue is that traffic is not getting back. It works on 10.1.10.252 because that server is dual homed and it has another interface on the data network, where its default route resides. So it is sending its return traffic not to 10.1.10.1, but to the data subnet default gateway.
I will assume that the DATA or the 11.11.11.x network is on VLAN 1, because you have not provided that info.
Assumptions :
VLAN 1 is your 11.11.11.x subnet
11.11.11.2 is available for use on your router.
The CCM Server is pointing to 10.1.10.1 as its default gateway.
Add this to your router...
interface GigabitEthernet0/0.1
encapsulation dot1Q 1
ip address 11.11.11.2 255.255.255.0
no snmp trap link-status
!
ip route 10.2.2.0 255.255.255.0 11.11.11.1
Ok, here's where we are.
Cisco 2821 interfaces configured as follows:
interface GigabitEthernet0/0
description $ETH-LAN$$ETH-SW-LAUNCH$$I
no ip address
no ip mroute-cache
duplex auto
speed auto
!
interface GigabitEthernet0/0.100
encapsulation dot1Q 100
ip address 10.1.10.1 255.255.255.0
no snmp trap link-status
service-policy output output-L3-to-L2
!
interface GigabitEthernet0/0.200
encapsulation dot1Q 200 native
ip address 192.168.1.1 255.255.255.0
no snmp trap link-status
!
interface GigabitEthernet0/0.300
encapsulation dot1Q 1
ip address 11.11.11.2 255.255.255.0
no snmp trap link-status
!
interface GigabitEthernet0/1
no ip address
shutdown
duplex auto
speed auto
!
interface Serial0/0/0:15
no ip address
encapsulation hdlc
isdn switch-type primary-net5
isdn incoming-voice voice
no cdp enable
!
ip route 10.2.2.0 255.255.255.0 11.11.11.1
From 10.2.2.0 (remote network) I can ping:
11.11.11.2 but not 10.1.10.1
From 2821 I cannot ping 11.11.11.1 or 10.2.2.0 even though subinterface has 11.11.11.2 as configured address.
Cisco phone at remote site is looping through opening 10.1.10.1 - configuring CM list.
What does service-policy output output-L3-to-L2 mean? This is set on the GigabitEthernet0/0.100 interface.
Why can I ping 11.11.11.2 from the remote network but not back?
Thanks
Dave
class-map match-all L3-to-L2_VoIP-Cntrl
match ip dscp af31
class-map match-all L3-to-L2_VoIP-RTP
match ip dscp ef
!
!
policy-map output-L3-to-L2
class L3-to-L2_VoIP-RTP
set cos 5
class L3-to-L2_VoIP-Cntrl
set cos 3
That is what the Service policy output L3 to L2 does, it maps DSCP af31 t cos 5 and DSCP ef to cos 3. It is just a transition of the qos marking from layer 3 DSCP marking to layer 2 COS Marking. Doesn't really do anything, except let the switch know what traffic is important.
You have to be able to ping 11.11.11.1 from 11.11.11.2. If you can't do that then your PIX, must not be plugged into VLAN 1 on your switch.
Can you please do a show vlan, and a show int status on the switch and then tell us what ports the pix and router are connected to.
We need the interface that has 11.11.11.1 to be in the same vlan as the PIX. I am starting to think that you have two subnets overlapping on the same VLAN, which is not a good design, but we could still make this work if we move the 11.11.11.1 to a secondary interface on the 100 vlan.
Do you know if the what VLAN the PIX is connected to?
Hmm.
Remove the 11.11.11.2 from the trunk'd vlan 1 interface on the 2821, and put it on GIG0/1.
Then plug GIG 0/1 into the 4 port switch in the back of the PIX 501.
The CE500 is very likely your issue. Those things are horrible. They turn on all kinds of anti-spoofing and arp suppression and if you use the smart port configs which you probably did, then they wreak havok on trying to get things to work at all.
They have access to the command line through http://switchip/exec
If you are familiar with switch command line, then I suggest you go spend 6-8 hours in that exec interface cleaning things up. If not then you might be better served getting a 2960 switch with POE to replace the CE500.
There really is no way for us to troubleshoot all the things that could be wrong with that CE500 over this forum. But if you plug your Gig 0/1 directly into the firewall's switch, then you essentially bypass all that nonsense. I really don't know why it is that you can ping 11.11.11.2 on the 501, and still not get to 10.1.10.1, except that the CE500 must somehow be messing it up.
Business Accounts
Answer for Membership
by: FaithShieldPosted on 2008-05-09 at 19:06:13ID: 21537564
I'm a little confused as to the layout of your network.
This is what I understood so far.
You have a host site, with CCM, and a PIX firewall, that has a data network of 11.11.11.x and a voice network of 10.1.10.x.
You have 857 routers at remote sites that are connected over VPN to the 501.
The data portion of the VPN is working fine, but you want to also add phones at the remote sites and have them connect to CCM at the host.
If all of that is true, then you have two issues to overcome.
1. You must add the voice subnet to the VPN. This is done by adding an entry to the nat 0 acl on the pix, and the crypto map acl on the pix, that matches traffic from the host voice subnet 10.1.10.x to the remote subnet. Since you have multiple 857's you will have to edit multiple access lists. On the remote sites you will also have to adjust the crypto map acl's and the access lists that prevent traffic from translations.
2. In order for the phones at the remote sites to see call manager you need to add the TFTP server option to your DHCP scope. if it is done on the 857 it is rather simple just go into the dhcp scope and add the command "option 150 10.1.10.x" , but put the ip address of call manager.
This is the best I can do without seeing your configs. If you want to post sanitized configs I can look at them. I need one 857 config and the PIX 501 config.