I'm wondering if the Microtik has multiple default routes in it? Sometimes it uses the good next hop, sometimes the bad one...
Main Topics
Browse All Topicsusers
|
Mikrotik -- Internet
|
ASA
|
ServerA and ServerB
I'm trying to troubleshoot a problem with a Cisco ASA 5505. The network design is as above - the Microtik is the existing router, ServerA and ServerB used to plug directly into it.
ServerA has IP 10.30.1.10, ServerB has IP 10.30.1.11
The ASA is configured with no NAT, a "allow anything" firewall, and uses the microtik as its default gateway. In effect, it is currently a simple IP router; the firewall and VPN stuff will all come later once the basics are working.
Th problem is access to ServerA and ServerB is erratic - sometimes it will work, sometimes it will fail. It can fail for eather one of the servers only, or both.
When it is working:
The Mikrotik logs show ping packets being sent out over the proper interface
The ASA logs show the incomming connections.
When it is failing:
The Mikrotik logs show ping packets being sent out over the proper interface
The ASA logs show nothing reaching the ASA.
This can fail for one server only (e.g.: the Mikrotik is putting out packets to 10.30.1.10 and 10.30.1.11, but the ASA is only seeing packets arrive destined for 10.30.1.11)
It can fail for one source only (e.g.: ClientA on the users network can ping 10.30.1.11, but clientB cannot)
The problem can also be seen from the mikrotik router itself; sometimes it can ping ServerA and ServerB, sometimes it can only ping one of them
What could be cauing this? I can't think of any possible cause that is intermittant and could explain why the problem may occur for one destination server and not others.
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.
Rigth now, it is redundant. Once the ASA is installed it will be used as a VPN endpoint for the inside network as well as some additional routing, but obviously before we get the VPN to work we need to have the extreme basics (plug in system, be able to reliably connect to it) working.
After talking to Cisco support they're sending out a replacement ASA because they can't figure out what is wrong, so we'll see how that goes tomorrow.
... except for the fact that the mikrotik manages a bunch of other subnets that are not relevent to this question, meaning it is not to be discarded.
Cisco is in use because the VPN will be with other Cisco endpoints, and using all Cisco means we can be confident that the VPN will work instead of saying "yeah, they should be compatible, we just need to collect together forum posts and out of date how-tos in order to get the whole thing working with no recourse if it fails"
>> "yeah, they should be compatible, we just need to collect together forum posts and out of date how-tos in order to get the whole thing working with no recourse if it fails"
heheh - yeah, there's one reason to use cisco ;-) (There are some good Mikrotik consultants aroud tho!)
even so, it still makes sense to use one or the other in that setup - I guess this is only a fraction of what is really connected, but it is hard to dagnose a problem when we see only a small part of the full picture. See how the replacement gear goes - wouldn't be the first time that I've heard of a cisco router being buggy on arrival (not Mikrotik for that matter!)
Cheers!
Cisco support couldn't figure this one out so they sent out a replacement ASA. That did not change the symptoms; the ASA simply seems unable to act as a normal router that passes packets through reliably.
We've given up on getting this to work and have just use static NAT to expose the servers on the ASAs outside interface; dropping the static routing entry on the microtik. It's a bit of hassle, but at least lets us proceed with the network setup.
Business Accounts
Answer for Membership
by: DrStalkerPosted on 2009-09-20 at 21:33:05ID: 25380340
ASA config attached
ASA config