Still celebrating National IT Professionals Day with 3 months of free Premium Membership. Use Code ITDAY17

x
?
Solved

ACL's for L2L VPN

Posted on 2007-03-19
11
Medium Priority
?
671 Views
Last Modified: 2008-01-09
Guys,

I came across a weird problem last week.

My ACL's for the match statements on the L2L VPN's have always contained the 'any' keyword in the source section.

eg. access-list VPN permit ip any 192.168.0.0 255.255.255.0

This has always worked in the past. I have recently deployed an ASA. I could see the VPN from the remote site (PIX 501, OS 6.5(3)) coming up, but the return tunnel from the ASA to the PIX wouldn't come up. It wasn't until I remove the any statement and specified the source network that the tunnel came up.

Is this by design, or is this supposed to work with any as the source address?

Thanks,

Chris.
0
Comment
Question by:InteraX
[X]
Welcome to Experts Exchange

Add your voice to the tech community where 5M+ people just like you are talking about what matters.

  • Help others & share knowledge
  • Earn cash & points
  • Learn & ask questions
  • 6
  • 5
11 Comments
 
LVL 28

Accepted Solution

by:
batry_boy earned 375 total points
ID: 18747467
I've never seen it explicitly written out in the documentation, but I've always seen flaky behavior when using "any" as either the source or destination in a crypto ACL.  I've been told numerous times by the Cisco TAC that crypto ACL's need to be mirror images of each other on either side of a VPN tunnel (source-destination wise).  I only have anecdotal evidence that this is the case, but it's probably good practice to be specific on crypto ACL's anyway.
0
 
LVL 16

Author Comment

by:InteraX
ID: 18747756
That matches my experiences.

Can you also answer the following.

I'm looking at using object groups to simplify my ACLs. I want to create one object group and deploy it to all my remote PIX's for use as the destination in the ACL.

eg. access-list VPN permit ip  192.168.0.0 255.255.255.0 object-group ALL_SITES

The object group ALL_Sites will contain the local network. Will this cause issues with the match statement?
0
 
LVL 28

Expert Comment

by:batry_boy
ID: 18748266
No that should be fine since using an object group really just expands to the individual objects when you display the ACL.  For example, if your object group contained networks 192.168.1.0/24 and 192.168.2.0/24, then an ACL that looks like this in the "show run" output:

access-list VPN permit ip  192.168.0.0 255.255.255.0 object-group ALL_SITES

If you issued the command "show access-list VPN", it would expand out the individual entries from the object group and show you:

access-list VPN permit ip 192.168.0.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.1.0 255.255.255.0
access-list VPN permit ip 192.168.0.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.2.0 255.255.255.0

0
Get your Disaster Recovery as a Service basics

Disaster Recovery as a Service is one go-to solution that revolutionizes DR planning. Implementing DRaaS could be an efficient process, easily accessible to non-DR experts. Learn about monitoring, testing, executing failovers and failbacks to ensure a "healthy" DR environment.

 
LVL 16

Author Comment

by:InteraX
ID: 18748296
What happens though if you end up with one of the lines reading as follows.

access-list VPN permit ip 192.168.0.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.0.0 255.255.255.0

ie. both source and destination networks are the same.
0
 
LVL 28

Expert Comment

by:batry_boy
ID: 18748333
Yeah, if you're object group contains source networks and you're applying the object group as a destination, this will definitely cause erratic behavior.  If you use object groups make sure you construct them such that this doesn't happen.  You may not be able to deploy a "global" object group on all your PIX'es that are the same everywhere...you may wind up having to customize them for each site...actually, you probably will have to.
0
 
LVL 16

Author Comment

by:InteraX
ID: 18748429
Ok,

So the 'rules' are basically, don't use the 'any' keyword and ensure that you don't have any ACE's where the source and destination network are the same.

Thanks.
0
 
LVL 16

Author Comment

by:InteraX
ID: 18748445
What if I have a deny ACE at the start of the ACL that denys traffic with the same source and destination networks?
0
 
LVL 28

Expert Comment

by:batry_boy
ID: 18748935
I don't see any reason to put such an ACE in a crypto ACL.  If you don't want some specific traffic to be encrypted and subsequently sent down the tunnel, then just don't include it in the ACL at all.
0
 
LVL 16

Author Comment

by:InteraX
ID: 18749198
I'm thinking that you would have the object group with the same source and destination networks allowed, but explicitly blocked before the object groups.
0
 
LVL 28

Expert Comment

by:batry_boy
ID: 18749515
If you want to reuse the same object group definition I suppose that is a way you could do that, but you would then have to create custom deny statements on each PIX to block the traffic you don't want encrypted.  It seems to me that it would just be easier to create custom crypto ACL's with only permit statements on each side of the tunnel.  This is the customary way of doing this...
0
 
LVL 16

Author Comment

by:InteraX
ID: 18754920
Thanks.
0

Featured Post

New feature and membership benefit!

New feature! Upgrade and increase expert visibility of your issues with Priority Questions.

Question has a verified solution.

If you are experiencing a similar issue, please ask a related question

During and after that shift to cloud, one area that still poses a struggle for many organizations is what to do with their department file shares.
As managed cloud service providers, we often get asked to intervene when cloud deployments go awry. Attracted by apparent ease-of-use, flexibility and low computing costs, companies quickly adopt leading public cloud platforms such as Amazon Web Ser…
Both in life and business – not all partnerships are created equal. As the demand for cloud services increases, so do the number of self-proclaimed cloud partners. Asking the right questions up front in the partnership, will enable both parties …
As a trusted technology advisor to your customers you are likely getting the daily question of, ‘should I put this in the cloud?’ As customer demands for cloud services increases, companies will see a shift from traditional buying patterns to new…

670 members asked questions and received personalized solutions in the past 7 days.

Join the community of 500,000 technology professionals and ask your questions.

Join & Ask a Question