Timeline for Policy Based Routing for VPN connections with VPN Client configuration
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 28, 2016 at 8:02 | vote | accept | Spirit | ||
| Jul 28, 2016 at 8:01 | vote | accept | Spirit | ||
| Jul 28, 2016 at 8:01 | |||||
| Dec 20, 2013 at 17:18 | comment | added | John Kennedy | sorry, after reviewing your topology I believe I made a mistake earlier, I will answer again with a new ACL and route-map. The reason packets aren't matching that ACL is because IPSEC traffic isn't flowing thru that interface. | |
| Dec 20, 2013 at 16:52 | comment | added | Spirit | It is for the second lan interface, because there are two lan segments. I just updated the original post. | |
| Dec 20, 2013 at 16:39 | comment | added | John Kennedy | you do not need an additional route map | |
| Dec 20, 2013 at 16:27 | comment | added | Spirit | I just did as your sugestion but not luck. There was an ahp, esp, options and I added a separate route map of the other lan interface. The VPN was still working i.e. I was still able to connect, however the traffic was still routing IN the FAST-WAN and OUT of the SLOW-WAN. I will update the main question with more details. | |
| Dec 20, 2013 at 12:03 | comment | added | Spirit | I see where I was mistaken, I was trying a similar aproach but I was trying to put another ACL on the Loopback and on the VirtualTemplate interfaces, and then the VPN vas malfunctioning. I will try your suggestion and post the results. | |
| Dec 19, 2013 at 14:58 | history | answered | John Kennedy | CC BY-SA 3.0 |