ulink
asked on
Cisco VPN on a router that is not the default gateway?
I installed a Cisco 2621 Router that is supposed to provide VPN access into a network. The VPN connects fine, but I am only able to ping a couple of switches. I suspect it is because the Router that is providing the VPN is not the default gatewaty for the network. Is there any way to force the cisco to blindly push all traffic to an internal IP address (the default gateway) or do I just have my access-lists wrong?
Below are the interesting portions of my config.
Below are the interesting portions of my config.
crypto isakmp policy 3
encr 3des
authentication pre-share
group 2
!
crypto isakmp client configuration group vpn-mobile-user
key
dns
domain
pool ippool
acl 105
!
!
crypto ipsec transform-set default-set esp-3des esp-sha-hmac
crypto mib topn interval 60
!
crypto dynamic-map default-map 13
set transform-set default-set
!
!
crypto map mobile-map client authentication list vpn-mobile-user
crypto map mobile-map isakmp authorization list vpn-mobile-user
crypto map mobile-map client configuration address respond
crypto map mobile-map 13 ipsec-isakmp dynamic default-map
!
!
interface FastEthernet0/0
ip address x.x.x.x 255.255.255.248
ip nat outside
half-duplex
no cdp enable
crypto map mobile-map
!
interface FastEthernet0/1
ip address 10.27.205.101 255.255.255.0
ip nat inside
speed auto
no cdp enable
!
router eigrp 100
redistribute static
network 10.27.205.0 0.0.0.255
no auto-summary
!
ip local pool ippool 10.27.206.100 10.27.206.199
ip nat inside source route-map nonat interface FastEthernet0/0 overload
ip classless
ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 x.x.x.x
no ip http server
no ip http secure-server
!
!
!
access-list 105 permit ip 10.27.205.0 0.0.0.255 10.27.206.0 0.0.0.255
access-list 125 deny ip 10.27.205.0 0.0.0.255 10.27.206.0 0.0.0.255
access-list 125 deny ip 10.27.205.0 0.0.0.255 10.27.205.0 0.0.0.255
access-list 125 permit ip 10.27.205.0 0.0.0.255 any
no cdp run
!
route-map nonat permit 10
match ip address 125
Ilir Mitrushi
You are using split tunneling defined by acl 105. This means that the remote client will know only this subnet and will route and encrypt data only for this subnet. You can include more subnets into this list or remove the list altogether, in which case all traffic on the remote client will be routed through the vpn tunnel. For the main site to know how to route traffic to the vpn client you can add reverse-route to your config under dynamic-map or add static routes manually to your config. You can find an excellent series on vpn and other topics at this link http://www.nil.com/ipcorner
ASKER CERTIFIED SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
ASKER
That did the trick, thanks
Out of curiosity, can vpn users on the 10.27.206.100 10.27.206.199 pool have access to all your internal subnets just by adding the static route on your default gateway router? It was my undestanding that the vpn client will insert routes only for subnets specified on the split tunnel acl.
ASKER
I believe the problem in this case is that packets could get into the network, but nothing could get back out because all packets not destined for the internal network get sent to the Router. SO the Router needs to know how to get the packets back to the ip pool.
Yes, of course this is the case for traffic coming from the vpn ip pool towards the 10.27.205.0/24 subnet declared on acl 105. I assumed that you wanted to give access to other internal subnets beside the 10.27.205.0 subnet. This is why I suggested the modification of acl 105. This issue is separate from adding the necessary routes from your main router to the vpn router.