11-13-2013 01:58 AM - edited 03-11-2019 08:04 PM
I've experienced a few issues with enabling anti-spoofing through the unicast reverse path forwarding feature on ASAs.
The version in question is 9.1.3 on an HA pair of ASA5550's.
When enabling this through the commands: ip verify reverse-path interface interface_name it seemed to cause a couple of issues:
(it was enabled on all interfaces to begin with)
1. The first issue was that all outbound traffic was dropped altogether.
2. The second issue was that for connected remote access VPN clients, they were able to connect fine but subsequent outbound internet connectivity was unavailable until this page was refreshed several times. This issue went away as soon as this feature was removed.
I know that unicast reverse path forwarding typically should only uncover problems with the flow of network due to diverse routing etc. but I was wondering whether anyone has uncovered any strangle anomolies when implementing this.
Thanks, Anish
11-13-2013 07:24 PM
Can you please post the configuration and show route plus show arp.
11-14-2013 12:23 AM
The only times I have had issues with uRPF is when I made configuration mistakes. You might already know this but uRPF makes decisions based on what is in your routing table.
Do you by chance have asymmetric routing in your network?
11-14-2013 06:00 AM
For outside traffic, for example, the ASA can use the default route to satisfy Unicast RPF protection. If traffic enters from an outside interface, and the source address is not known to the routing table, the ASA uses the default route to correctly identify the outside interface as the source interface.
11-14-2013 06:01 AM
If the packet comes from a different ARP entry than the associated to the default gateway IP it drops it
11-14-2013 06:05 AM
Well it could be said other IP other than default gateway if it does not have the route to that address.
11-14-2013 06:06 AM
Another possibility is that if the ASA receives a packet on an interface, but it actually expects to receive it on another, that packet will be considered as a spoof and it will be dropped.
11-24-2013 01:32 PM
Hi All,
Thanks so much for your replies. It turned out that there was neither diverse/asymmetric routing in place but the drops were all packets that should have been dropped such as broadcasts. We never got to the bottom of the VPN anomaly as it seemed to resolve itself but that seemed to be AV linked.
Thanks, Anish
11-24-2013 09:18 PM
Hello Anish,
Just as a comment remember that the ASA only supports RPF Strict mode so whenever a packet violates that check the traffic will be drop.
Asymetric routing was the cause of the problem.
Packet-captures and logs for the next time
Any other question you have? Otherwise you can mark it as answered~
Rate all of the helpful posts!!!
Regards,
Jcarvaja
Follow me on http://laguiadelnetworking.com
Discover and save your favorite ideas. Come back to expert answers, step-by-step guides, recent topics, and more.
New here? Get started with these tips. How to use Community New member guide