<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic VPN tunnel for some subnets doesn't work in Network Security</title>
    <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/vpn-tunnel-for-some-subnets-doesn-t-work/m-p/2895081#M172244</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="color: #1f497d;"&gt;I have the 10.64.0.0 subnet and 172.21.0.0 subnet that talk to each other via the tunnel. Everyday in the morning i have to bounce the tunnel to get this working. I have case opened with the TAC engineer but seems like there is no resolution to this.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="color: #1f497d;"&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="color: #1f497d;"&gt;IMMCUSTFW01#&amp;nbsp; sh asp table classify crypto | be out&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="color: #1f497d;"&gt;out id=0xad1abc10, priority=70, domain=encrypt, deny=false&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="color: #1f497d;"&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; hits=3270, user_data=0x3b27dc, cs_id=0xacc6dbd8, reverse, flags=0x0, protocol=0&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="color: #1f497d;"&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; src ip=10.64.0.0, mask=255.255.0.0, port=0&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="color: #1f497d;"&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; dst ip=172.21.0.0, mask=255.255.0.0, port=0, dscp=0x0&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="color: #1f497d;"&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="color: #1f497d;"&gt;out id=0xacccd398, priority=70, domain=encrypt, deny=false&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="color: #1f497d;"&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; hits=1676, user_data=0x0, cs_id=0xacc6dbd8, reverse, flags=0x0, protocol=0&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="color: #1f497d;"&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; src ip=10.64.0.0, mask=255.255.0.0, port=0&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="color: #1f497d;"&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; dst ip=172.21.0.0, mask=255.255.0.0, port=0, dscp=0x0&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="color: #1f497d;"&gt;Last clearing of hits counters: Never&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="color: #1f497d;"&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;IMMCUSTFW01# show crypto ipsec sa peer 148.61.xx.xx&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Crypto map tag: Outside_map, seq num: 12, local addr: 63.111.xx.xx&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;access-list outside_14_cryptomap extended permit ip 10.64.0.0 255.255.0.0 172.21.0.0 255.255.0.0&lt;BR /&gt; local ident (addr/mask/prot/port): (10.64.0.0/255.255.0.0/0/0)&lt;BR /&gt; remote ident (addr/mask/prot/port): (172.21.0.0/255.255.0.0/0/0)&lt;BR /&gt; current_peer: 148.61.xx.xx&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;#pkts encaps: 4784, #pkts encrypt: 4784, #pkts digest: 4784&lt;BR /&gt; #pkts decaps: 4782, #pkts decrypt: 4782, #pkts verify: 4782&lt;BR /&gt; #pkts compressed: 0, #pkts decompressed: 0&lt;BR /&gt; #pkts not compressed: 4784, #pkts comp failed: 0, #pkts decomp failed: 0&lt;BR /&gt; #pre-frag successes: 0, #pre-frag failures: 0, #fragments created: 0&lt;BR /&gt; #PMTUs sent: 0, #PMTUs rcvd: 0, #decapsulated frgs needing reassembly: 0&lt;BR /&gt; #send errors: 0, #recv errors: 0&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;local crypto endpt.: 63.111.xx.xx, remote crypto endpt.: 148.61.xx.xx&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;path mtu 1500, ipsec overhead 58, media mtu 1500&lt;BR /&gt; current outbound spi: 71792FB1&lt;BR /&gt; current inbound spi : 42E74BAC&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="color: #1f497d;"&gt;The TAC engineer says that the SPI values are different from &amp;nbsp;the existing once to the once that are found in the output shown above for the SAs(&lt;SPAN&gt;sh asp table classify crypto | be out&lt;/SPAN&gt;). I am running the 8.2.5 version of ASA code. There is no way to delete the inactive SPIs in this version of code. Has anyone have encountered such a situation and would like to know how to resolve this issue.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="color: #1f497d;"&gt;When the traffic is not reachable no SAs are formed between the peer for those subnets but i can see for those subnets in the&amp;nbsp;&lt;SPAN&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;sh asp table classify crypto&lt;/STRONG&gt; &lt;STRONG&gt;| be out&lt;/STRONG&gt;. Once i bounce the tunnel, SAs are formed but the SPI values are different when compared to those in the&amp;nbsp;&lt;STRONG&gt;sh asp table classify crypto | be out.&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="color: #1f497d;"&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="color: #1f497d;"&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Tue, 12 Mar 2019 07:23:32 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>vishnureddy1979</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2019-03-12T07:23:32Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>VPN tunnel for some subnets doesn't work</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/vpn-tunnel-for-some-subnets-doesn-t-work/m-p/2895081#M172244</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="color: #1f497d;"&gt;I have the 10.64.0.0 subnet and 172.21.0.0 subnet that talk to each other via the tunnel. Everyday in the morning i have to bounce the tunnel to get this working. I have case opened with the TAC engineer but seems like there is no resolution to this.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="color: #1f497d;"&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="color: #1f497d;"&gt;IMMCUSTFW01#&amp;nbsp; sh asp table classify crypto | be out&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="color: #1f497d;"&gt;out id=0xad1abc10, priority=70, domain=encrypt, deny=false&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="color: #1f497d;"&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; hits=3270, user_data=0x3b27dc, cs_id=0xacc6dbd8, reverse, flags=0x0, protocol=0&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="color: #1f497d;"&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; src ip=10.64.0.0, mask=255.255.0.0, port=0&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="color: #1f497d;"&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; dst ip=172.21.0.0, mask=255.255.0.0, port=0, dscp=0x0&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="color: #1f497d;"&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="color: #1f497d;"&gt;out id=0xacccd398, priority=70, domain=encrypt, deny=false&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="color: #1f497d;"&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; hits=1676, user_data=0x0, cs_id=0xacc6dbd8, reverse, flags=0x0, protocol=0&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="color: #1f497d;"&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; src ip=10.64.0.0, mask=255.255.0.0, port=0&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="color: #1f497d;"&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; dst ip=172.21.0.0, mask=255.255.0.0, port=0, dscp=0x0&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="color: #1f497d;"&gt;Last clearing of hits counters: Never&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="color: #1f497d;"&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;IMMCUSTFW01# show crypto ipsec sa peer 148.61.xx.xx&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Crypto map tag: Outside_map, seq num: 12, local addr: 63.111.xx.xx&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;access-list outside_14_cryptomap extended permit ip 10.64.0.0 255.255.0.0 172.21.0.0 255.255.0.0&lt;BR /&gt; local ident (addr/mask/prot/port): (10.64.0.0/255.255.0.0/0/0)&lt;BR /&gt; remote ident (addr/mask/prot/port): (172.21.0.0/255.255.0.0/0/0)&lt;BR /&gt; current_peer: 148.61.xx.xx&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;#pkts encaps: 4784, #pkts encrypt: 4784, #pkts digest: 4784&lt;BR /&gt; #pkts decaps: 4782, #pkts decrypt: 4782, #pkts verify: 4782&lt;BR /&gt; #pkts compressed: 0, #pkts decompressed: 0&lt;BR /&gt; #pkts not compressed: 4784, #pkts comp failed: 0, #pkts decomp failed: 0&lt;BR /&gt; #pre-frag successes: 0, #pre-frag failures: 0, #fragments created: 0&lt;BR /&gt; #PMTUs sent: 0, #PMTUs rcvd: 0, #decapsulated frgs needing reassembly: 0&lt;BR /&gt; #send errors: 0, #recv errors: 0&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;local crypto endpt.: 63.111.xx.xx, remote crypto endpt.: 148.61.xx.xx&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;path mtu 1500, ipsec overhead 58, media mtu 1500&lt;BR /&gt; current outbound spi: 71792FB1&lt;BR /&gt; current inbound spi : 42E74BAC&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="color: #1f497d;"&gt;The TAC engineer says that the SPI values are different from &amp;nbsp;the existing once to the once that are found in the output shown above for the SAs(&lt;SPAN&gt;sh asp table classify crypto | be out&lt;/SPAN&gt;). I am running the 8.2.5 version of ASA code. There is no way to delete the inactive SPIs in this version of code. Has anyone have encountered such a situation and would like to know how to resolve this issue.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="color: #1f497d;"&gt;When the traffic is not reachable no SAs are formed between the peer for those subnets but i can see for those subnets in the&amp;nbsp;&lt;SPAN&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;sh asp table classify crypto&lt;/STRONG&gt; &lt;STRONG&gt;| be out&lt;/STRONG&gt;. Once i bounce the tunnel, SAs are formed but the SPI values are different when compared to those in the&amp;nbsp;&lt;STRONG&gt;sh asp table classify crypto | be out.&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="color: #1f497d;"&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="color: #1f497d;"&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 12 Mar 2019 07:23:32 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/vpn-tunnel-for-some-subnets-doesn-t-work/m-p/2895081#M172244</guid>
      <dc:creator>vishnureddy1979</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2019-03-12T07:23:32Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>I've been seeing something</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/vpn-tunnel-for-some-subnets-doesn-t-work/m-p/2895082#M172245</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;I've been seeing something similar on versions 8.2, 9.2, 9.4 first on 5520's and later on 5525-x.&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; I have a bunch of subnets carried over an IPsec tunnel, and occasionally two of them stop communicating.&amp;nbsp; It's not always the same two.&amp;nbsp; Often this is in conjunction with an IKE phase I error such as %ASA-5-750007 "peer lost", particularly if the WAN link between the firewalls gets lossy for a while.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Scuttlebutt at the University of Wisconsin - Madison is that I'm not the only one suffering from the problem.&amp;nbsp; I had a TAC cases open in 2013 and 2015 about this but didn't get any resolution.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;-- Jim Leinweber, WI State Lab of Hygiene&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 23 Feb 2016 23:37:01 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/vpn-tunnel-for-some-subnets-doesn-t-work/m-p/2895082#M172245</guid>
      <dc:creator>James Leinweber</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2016-02-23T23:37:01Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Have you tried disabling the</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/vpn-tunnel-for-some-subnets-doesn-t-work/m-p/2895083#M172246</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Have you tried disabling the keepalives at both ends of the VPN tunnel? &amp;nbsp;That way the tunnel should never be torn down and this issue "should" not be seen. &amp;nbsp;Not a permanent solution but possibly a workaround:&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;tunnel-group &amp;lt;PEER IP&amp;gt;&amp;nbsp;ipsec-attributes&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp; isakmp keepalive disable&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;--&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Please remember to select a correct answer and rate helpful posts&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 24 Feb 2016 07:50:01 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/vpn-tunnel-for-some-subnets-doesn-t-work/m-p/2895083#M172246</guid>
      <dc:creator>Marius Gunnerud</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2016-02-24T07:50:01Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Thanks for your reply. I have</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/vpn-tunnel-for-some-subnets-doesn-t-work/m-p/2895084#M172247</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Thanks for your reply. I have disabled keepalives for that particular tunnel and will monitor for some time.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 24 Feb 2016 14:27:36 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/vpn-tunnel-for-some-subnets-doesn-t-work/m-p/2895084#M172247</guid>
      <dc:creator>vishnureddy1979</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2016-02-24T14:27:36Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Did you find a fix to this?</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/vpn-tunnel-for-some-subnets-doesn-t-work/m-p/2895085#M172248</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Did you find a fix to this? &amp;nbsp;What was it please?&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 15 Sep 2016 07:42:38 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/vpn-tunnel-for-some-subnets-doesn-t-work/m-p/2895085#M172248</guid>
      <dc:creator>cw.ashton</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2016-09-15T07:42:38Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>I believe it was because of a</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/vpn-tunnel-for-some-subnets-doesn-t-work/m-p/2895086#M172249</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;I believe it was because of a cisco ASA buggy IOS. I have to upgrade to this&amp;nbsp;8.4(7)30 version. Its working fine now.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 15 Sep 2016 12:50:19 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/vpn-tunnel-for-some-subnets-doesn-t-work/m-p/2895086#M172249</guid>
      <dc:creator>vishnureddy1979</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2016-09-15T12:50:19Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Another possibility is that</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/vpn-tunnel-for-some-subnets-doesn-t-work/m-p/2895087#M172250</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Another possibility is that IKEv2 negotiations are buggier than IKEv1.&amp;nbsp; I'm getting better tunnel stability with the latter, sadly.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 15 Sep 2016 16:08:20 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/vpn-tunnel-for-some-subnets-doesn-t-work/m-p/2895087#M172250</guid>
      <dc:creator>James Leinweber</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2016-09-15T16:08:20Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

