topic Re: Redundant Tunnels in Network Security https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/redundant-tunnels/m-p/998459#M1050736 <HTML><HEAD></HEAD><BODY><P>I think this is possible as PIX can also exchange routes with dynamic protocols like OSPF. </P></BODY></HTML> Tue, 11 Mar 2008 21:47:45 GMT ivillegas 2008-03-11T21:47:45Z Redundant Tunnels https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/redundant-tunnels/m-p/998458#M1050734 <P>I would like if possible to configure this scenerio.</P><P></P><P>I have remote sites with PIX 506 s connecting to a cisco 2801 router with VPN AIM. This is working correctly. Now i have also a second 2801 for redundancy purposes. If i set the pix up with a second peer address of the 2801 #2 ISAKMP phase 1 completes successfully and i get 2 tunnels formed on the PIX . However a proper ipsec sa does not get generated for the second connection.</P><P></P><P>What i would like is to essentially load balance the traffic across the 2 vpn routers from the pix. I can accomplish this without a problem from the router side using equal cost routing but on the pix only one of them is allowed to be active at a time in an ipsec sa standpoint.</P><P></P><P>Is there something i am missing or is it not possible</P> Fri, 21 Feb 2020 09:55:47 GMT https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/redundant-tunnels/m-p/998458#M1050734 pprue 2020-02-21T09:55:47Z Re: Redundant Tunnels https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/redundant-tunnels/m-p/998459#M1050736 <HTML><HEAD></HEAD><BODY><P>I think this is possible as PIX can also exchange routes with dynamic protocols like OSPF. </P></BODY></HTML> Tue, 11 Mar 2008 21:47:45 GMT https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/redundant-tunnels/m-p/998459#M1050736 ivillegas 2008-03-11T21:47:45Z