08-18-2014 04:13 AM - edited 03-11-2019 09:38 PM
Hi,
We use ASA 9.1(2) to filter traffic in/out of our organisation. A dept within the organisation also have a firewall. They want to establish a site-site VPN tunnel with a remote firewall. We have allowed full access between the public address of the dept firewall and the remote firewall and full access between the remote firewall address and the dept firewall address . We do not use NAT.
The site-site VPN tunnel fails to establish.
The dept sysadmin has requested that we enable IPSec Passthrough. From my reading this will not make any difference as we allow full access between the firewalls in both directions. Is that correct?
Has anyone encountered issues with ASA 9.1(2) interfering with site-site tunnels?
Regards
Solved! Go to Solution.
08-18-2014 07:36 AM
>The dept sysadmin has requested that we enable IPSec Passthrough. From my reading this will not make any difference as we allow full access between the firewalls in both directions. Is that correct?
Yes, in that case, no IPsec-pass-through is needed. All you need is (in both directions):
If you allowed full IP-access between these two endpoints, it is more than enough.
08-18-2014 07:36 AM
>The dept sysadmin has requested that we enable IPSec Passthrough. From my reading this will not make any difference as we allow full access between the firewalls in both directions. Is that correct?
Yes, in that case, no IPsec-pass-through is needed. All you need is (in both directions):
If you allowed full IP-access between these two endpoints, it is more than enough.
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