cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
cancel
1039
Views
0
Helpful
2
Replies

Puzzled by Cisco IPsec sample configuration

bsierra
Level 1
Level 1

I’ve been getting up to speed on IPsec configuration by reading Cisco 15.1M&T online documentation and poring through dozens of online configuration examples.  By-and-large, the configurations online make sense and have been invaluable at getting my own working configurations up and running.

However, there’s one Cisco sample configuration that I can’t make any sense of.  It appears in “Security for VPNs with IPsec Configuration Guide — Cisco IOS Release 15.1MT”.  That sample configuration is reprinted below and is also available online at this location:

http://www.ciscosystems.com/en/US/docs/ios-xml/ios/sec_conn_vpnips/configuration/15-1mt/sec-cfg-vpn-ipsec.html#GUID-F11890DA-D492-4175-A54C-B829A88E18BA

Most configurations distinguish between the local LAN subnet, WAN subnet, remote subnet at the remote end of the tunnel, and a peer address associated with a remote router.  Thus, you’d see four distinct subnets overall referred to in the configuration.  However, in this particular Cisco example, it seems like the same 10.0.110.0/24 subnet is used for all four functions, which totally baffles me.  For example, access-list 120 refers to the same source range and destination, so I can’t see how this would work.  If anyone could comment on how this configuration works (or *if* it works), I’d greatly appreciate it.  It’s the one configuration that I can’t make any sense of whatsoever.

Here are the four ways the same 10.0.110.0/24 subnet is utilized:

   The LAN subnet defined by “ip address 10.0.110.1 255.255.255.0” in the FastEthernet0/1 interface.

   The WAN subnet is defined by “ip address 10.0.110.2 255.255.255.0” in the Fast Ethernet0/0 interface.

   The remote subnet at the end of the tunnel is defined by

       “access-list 120 permit ip 10.0.110.0 0.0.0.255 10.0.110.0 0.0.0.255”

   The remote IPsec peer is referred to as “10.0.110.1” in the isakmp key and crypto map, which is on the same 10.0.110.0/24 subnet.

================================================================

crypto isakmp policy 10
 encryption aes 256
 authentication pre-share
 lifetime 180
crypto isakmp key cisco123 address 10.0.110.1
!
!
crypto ipsec transform-set aesset esp-aes 256 esp-sha-hmac
 mode transport
!
crypto map aesmap 10 ipsec-isakmp
 set peer 10.0.110.1
 set transform-set aesset
 match address 120
!
!
!
voice call carrier capacity active
!
!
mta receive maximum-recipients 0
!
!
interface FastEthernet0/0
 ip address 10.0.110.2 255.255.255.0
 ip nat outside
 no ip route-cache
 no ip mroute-cache
 duplex auto
 speed auto
 crypto map aesmap
!
interface Serial0/0
 no ip address
 shutdown
!
interface FastEthernet0/1
 ip address 10.0.110.1 255.255.255.0
 ip nat inside
 no ip route-cache
 no ip mroute-cache
 duplex auto
 speed auto
!
ip nat inside source list 110 interface FastEthernet0/0 overload
ip classless
ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 10.5.1.1
ip route 10.0.110.0 255.255.255.0 FastEthernet0/0
ip route 172.18.124.0 255.255.255.0 10.5.1.1
ip route 172.18.125.3 255.255.255.255 10.5.1.1
ip http server
!
!
access-list 110 deny   ip 10.0.110.0 0.0.0.255 10.0.110.0 0.0.0.255
access-list 110 permit ip 10.0.110.0 0.0.0.255 any
access-list 120 permit ip 10.0.110.0 0.0.0.255 10.0.110.0 0.0.0.255
!
1 Accepted Solution

Accepted Solutions

Marcin Latosiewicz
Cisco Employee
Cisco Employee

Looks like a documentation bug - typically IOS will not allow same subnet in same VRF.

If you have the time bring this to attention of TAC.

View solution in original post

2 Replies 2

Marcin Latosiewicz
Cisco Employee
Cisco Employee

Looks like a documentation bug - typically IOS will not allow same subnet in same VRF.

If you have the time bring this to attention of TAC.

Thanks, Marcin.  I thought this configuration looked funny.  I’ll submit a TAC later today.