• Status: Solved
  • Priority: Medium
  • Security: Public
  • Views: 4306
  • Last Modified:

Failed VPN on Sonicwall to Cisco

I am getting an error I have never seen before on my firewall. I'm trying to establish a tunnel from my Sonicwall NSA 3500 to a Cisco ASA. It establishes Phase 1 fine but then it tries and immediately fails to connect to Phase 2. The message I get is:
Deleting IPsec SA (Phase 2) and then "Incompatible with older firmware" in the notes. Both devices are on the latest general firmware releases so I'm not sure why I would be getting this error. These devices were linked at one point in the past but that connection was removed. Now they need to be connected again. I have several other tunnels working properly on my device at this time.

Please see attached file for specific log error.
sonicwall.jpg
0
Tarkisal
Asked:
Tarkisal
  • 4
  • 3
1 Solution
 
Blue Street TechLast KnightsCommented:
Hi Tarkisal,

Most likely a mismatch of SA lifetime. The IPSEC is hardwired to an SA lifetime of 28800 seconds.

Reset the Lifetime value for both Phase 1 & 2 , in the Proposals tab of the GroupVPN Policy, to 28800, and let me know if that resolves the issue.

Also, make sure Enable Keep Alive is checked in the Advanced tab.
0
 
TarkisalAuthor Commented:
Thanks for the response. I changed the lifetime down to 3600 and reset the tunnel but I'm still getting that same error. The other party's device has a default of something higher - I think it's like 86400 seconds. I had tried setting mine to that number but the error remained.
0
 
Blue Street TechLast KnightsCommented:
Has anything changed regarding the proposals on either end? The Lifetimes should definitely match so make them match either at 86400 or 28800. Also, make sure Enable Keep Alive is checked in the Advanced tab.
0
Free Backup Tool for VMware and Hyper-V

Restore full virtual machine or individual guest files from 19 common file systems directly from the backup file. Schedule VM backups with PowerShell scripts. Set desired time, lean back and let the script to notify you via email upon completion.  

 
TarkisalAuthor Commented:
The proposals are the same. I believe it may have something to do with a NAT setup on the remote client's side. When they give me the NAT address starting with 172.30 I can't access it and I get that error message listed above. However, when he gives me a direct number starting with 10.88 the tunnel shows as up and I don't get that error.
0
 
Blue Street TechLast KnightsCommented:
Are you listing the Default Gateway correctly in both tunnels?
0
 
TarkisalAuthor Commented:
We finally figured out the problem. The configuration was wrong on the remote site. It turned out to be built in the wrong order which caused the issue. The admin had built the cryptomap first and the static NAT after and for whatever reason this caused the error. By reversing this process it connected normally. I still don't know what the original firmware error was from - perhaps it was because it saw a problem with the configuration?

In any case thanks to everyone for their help.
0
 
TarkisalAuthor Commented:
Though the responses I got were very helpful they did not touch on the right solution. This was most likely due to not enough information available.
0

Featured Post

Cyber Threats to Small Businesses (Part 2)

The evolving cybersecurity landscape presents SMBs with a host of new threats to their clients, their data, and their bottom line. In part 2 of this blog series, learn three quick processes Webroot’s CISO, Gary Hayslip, recommends to help small businesses beat modern threats.

  • 4
  • 3
Tackle projects and never again get stuck behind a technical roadblock.
Join Now