Hall of Fame

1. RobWill364,394
2. arnold197,721
3. MikeKane197,312
4. JFrederic...170,047
5. bignewf168,320
6. Qlemo140,915
7. lrmoore138,305
8. ikalmar110,182
9. dpk_wal89,572
10. deimark79,485
11. 3nerds72,036
12. asavener54,580
13. jodylemoine46,900
14. geergon36,385
15. RPPreacher34,355
16. ccomley33,840
17. Roachy1...33,822
18. uetian170733,444
19. MrHusy32,838
20. Quori32,527
21. PeteLong30,854
22. SysExpert30,361
23. giltjr30,241
24. alanhardisty27,978
25. mitrushi27,480

1. RobWill2,021,679
2. lrmoore1,323,628
3. batry_boy467,701
4. arnold359,804
5. dpk_wal265,644
6. JFrederic...242,427
7. MikeKane228,592
8. Qlemo226,232
9. grblades218,409
10. bignewf183,320
11. rsivanandan183,296
12. MrHusy128,332
13. TechSoEasy122,268
14. mwecom...120,329
15. PeteLong116,920
16. keith_ala...115,514
17. SysExpert114,141
18. calvinetter112,805
19. ikalmar110,182
20. Voltz-dk98,355
21. deimark93,160
22. Cyclops3...90,587
23. RPPreacher79,980
24. tim_holman75,964
25. 3nerds72,036

	[x] Posted via EE Mobile
	Search, ask, and monitor your questions on the go with EE Mobile. Visit Experts Exchange from your mobile device and never be out of touch again.

Question

	[x] Attachment Details

[x]

The Solution Rating System

With so many solutions, how can you tell which solutions are most likely to help you and which ones are not? To provide you with a tool to use, we rate our solutions based on various elements that most accurately determine if a solution is a quality solution. To explain what factors affect the solution rating, here are the elements we take into consideration when formulating our solution rating.

The Grade of the Solution
The Zone Rank of the Expert Providing the Solution
The Number of Author and Expert Comments
The Number of Experts Contributing
The Feedback of the Community

Your Input Matters
Because of the way the system is set up, the most important variable in this equation is you. As a member of Experts Exchange, you are able to cast your vote on the quality of the solutions in regard to how complete, accurate, helpful and easy to understand each solution is. When you provide your feedback, each rating is adjusted accordingly. So, if you see a solution that has a poor rating that you think is a good solution, let us know by rating it. As you do, the rating will be adjusted and will become more accurate for other members of our site.

If you have any suggestions that you would like to make for our rating system, please ask a question in the Suggestions Zone of Community Support.

Thank you!

7.2

Site to Site VPN keeps dropping, QM FSM Error, etc

Asked by theB0FH in Virtual Private Networking (VPN), IPSec Security Protocol, Networking Hardware Firewalls

Tags: Cisco, ASA5520, PIX506e and 851 Router, L2L VPN tunnel through 851 Router

Hi all

This is a bit mind boggling. Short summary of the WAN. We have two sites that are inter-connected via IPSec VPN tunnel. At HQ is an ASA5520 and at the remote site is a PIX506e. This Pix is plugged into a Cisco 851 Router which in turn is plugged into the ISP.

Last week we replaced an old Linksys router with the aforementioned Cisco 851 (no fancy config, just plain routing). Ever since the swap I see the following errors in the HQ ASA's log all the time:

3 Aug 04 2008 09:51:29 713902 Group = 89.x.y.z, IP = 89.x.y.z, Removing peer from correlator table failed, no match!
3 Aug 04 2008 09:51:29 713902 Group = 89.x.y.z, IP = 89.x.y.z, Removing peer from correlator table failed, no match!
3 Aug 04 2008 09:51:29 713902 Group = 89.x.y.z, IP = 89.x.y.z, QM FSM error (P2 struct &0x4ed8c40, mess id 0xb8812293)!
3 Aug 04 2008 09:51:29 713227 IP = 89.x.y.z, Rejecting new IPSec SA negotiation for peer z.y.x.89. A negotiation was already in progress for local Proxy 172.30.50.0/255.255.254.0, remote Proxy 10.11.12.0/255.255.255.0
3 Aug 04 2008 09:51:29 713902 Group = 89.x.y.z, IP = 89.x.y.z, QM FSM error (P2 struct &0x4f5c2f0, mess id 0x7926298)!
3 Aug 04 2008 09:51:29 713902 Group = 89.x.y.z, IP = 89.x.y.z, Removing peer from correlator table failed, no match!
3 Aug 04 2008 09:51:29 713902 Group = 89.x.y.z, IP = 89.x.y.z, QM FSM error (P2 struct &0x4f0bff8, mess id 0xbf087005)!

The strangest thing is that the tunnel is up enough for the likes of exchange traffic to go though it, but you do consistently get messages in outlook saying it's lost connectivity to the exchange server.

Has anybody seen this before and how do I debug/fix it? This is fairly urgent as we have developers working remotely who can't really afford having their connection drop all the time.

Thanks in advance for any input.

View the Solution FREE for 30 Days

	Title
1	PIX VPN QM_IDLE
2	VPN Tunnel: IPSec
3	VPN connection failed between PIX 5…
4	Cisco site-to-site VPN tunnel down o…
5	Site-to-Site VPN from ASA 5505 t…
6	PIX to PIX VPN not working!

Site to Site VPN keeps dropping, QM FSM Error, etc

Asked by theB0FH in Virtual Private Networking (VPN), IPSec Security Protocol, Networking Hardware Firewalls

Tags: Cisco, ASA5520, PIX506e and 851 Router, L2L VPN tunnel through 851 Router

About this solution