Hi Dean,

You should remove the second line in the access-list ( permit ip host 192.168.19.9 host 192.168.16.13) as I assume that those ip-addresses are the external side of the GETVPN. Those entries should not be included in the access-list that defines what traffic is to be encrypted, because that will not work.

If you remove that line, traffic between 192.168.16.9 and 192.168.16.3 is not encrypted, but traffic from 203.166.26.233 to 203.166.26.225 is. Only internal traffic must be included in the GETVPN access-list (which is logical, as the GETVPN was originally intended for securing MPLS based WAN connections, and the external (WAN) connection is usually assigned by the MPLS provider and not the internal LAN which you want to secure).

HTH

Pieter-Jan

On 9 sep 2009, at 20:04, Dean Armada wrote:

Hi Pieter,

Thanks for the added information. I am doing some experiment right now and it seems that it is not getting any traffic from either Public or Private IP addresses. Is it because my Group Member IDs and Key Server ID are Private IPs? I am able to reach ip address if I remove crypto map.


GROUP INFORMATION

    Group Name               : gdoi-group
    Group Identity           : 1
    Rekeys received          : 0
    IPSec SA Direction       : Both
    Active Group Server      : 192.168.16.1
    Group Server list        : 192.168.16.1
                              
    GM Reregisters in        : 5555 secs
    Rekey Received           : never


    Rekeys received         
         Cumulative          : 0
         After registration  : 0

 ACL Downloaded From KS 192.168.16.1:
   access-list  permit ip host 203.166.26.233 host 203.166.26.225
   access-list  permit ip host 192.168.16.9 host 192.168.16.13

TEK POLICY for the current KS-Policy ACEs Downloaded:
  GigabitEthernet0/1.26:
    IPsec SA:
        spi: 0x75C3FCC2(1975778498)
        transform: esp-256-aes esp-sha-hmac
        sa timing:remaining key lifetime (sec): (5795)
        Anti-Replay(Time Based) : 10 sec interval



GM1(config-subif)#do ping 203.166.26.225 so 203.166.26.233

Type escape sequence to abort.
Sending 5, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 203.166.26.225, timeout is 2 seconds:
Packet sent with a source address of 203.166.26.233
.....
Success rate is 0 percent (0/5)
GM1(config-subif)#do ping 192.168.16.13 so 192.168.16.9

Type escape sequence to abort.
Sending 5, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 192.168.16.13, timeout is 2 seconds:
Packet sent with a source address of 192.168.16.9
.....
Success rate is 0 percent (0/5)



Thanks ,

Dean


On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 2:42 AM, Pieter-Jan Nefkens <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi dean,

It is only possible to use GETVPN on the Internet if all sites are using publicly assigned ip-address and not using RFC 1918 (private address range) addressing.
The reason is that GETVPN only encrypts the payload of the IP packet, and not the original source and destination address.

Private IP's are therefore not possible to be used, as those IP addresses are at most ISP's, and at least at the carrier level, dropped at the edge (RFC2827 ingress and egress filtering)

So yes, you can setup a GETVPN session, but only traffic from public ip-addresses are possible, no traffic is possible (not even without encryption) with private ip-addresses

Pieter-Jan


On 8 sep 2009, at 20:19, Dean Armada wrote:

From my understanding If we use internet as a transport of GETVPN.

- The GM will get a GDOI_REKEY/GDOI_IDLE a will able to download ACL from the KS right?
- But there will be no traffic encryption from GM to other GMs (Private IP used)
- traffic encryption from GM to other GMs if Public IP is used
I might be wrong or may be lacking something. Please post any additional information.
Thanks


On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 4:23 AM, Tyson Scott <[email protected]> wrote:

It was designed for internal encryption.  I.E.  between branches of a financial institutions, government entities, etc, or other hypersensitive information companies.  It is very well designed for this purpose.

 

Regards,

 

Tyson Scott - CCIE #13513 R&S and Security

Technical Instructor - IPexpert, Inc.


Telephone: +1.810.326.1444
Cell: +1.248.504.7309
Fax: +1.810.454.0130
Mailto:  [email protected]

 

Join our free online support and peer group communities: http://www.IPexpert.com/communities

 

IPexpert - The Global Leader in Self-Study, Classroom-Based, Video On Demand and Audio Certification Training Tools for the Cisco CCIE R&S Lab, CCIE Security Lab, CCIE Service Provider Lab , CCIE Voice Lab and CCIE Storage Lab Certifications.

 

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Kingsley Charles
Sent: Thursday, September 03, 2009 6:09 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [OSL | CCIE_Security] GETVPN in internet

 

Hi all

 

GETVPN is an IPSec feature which adds the IP source/destination address from the payload which was encrypted. It is equivalent to IPSec transport mode. Due to this feature, GETVPN can't be used on private networks like MPLS but not on Internet.

 

Does anyone know, why was GETVPN implemented this way where it uses the original IP source/destination address and thereby can't be used on Internet?

 
 
 
 

With regards

Kings


_______________________________________________
For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com



_______________________________________________
For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com

---
Nefkens Advies
Enk 26
4214 DD Vuren
The Netherlands

Tel: +31 183 634730
Fax: +31 183 690113
Cell: +31 654 323221

<green.gif> Think before you print.





_______________________________________________
For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com

---

Nefkens Advies

Enk 26

4214 DD Vuren

The Netherlands


Tel: +31 183 634730

Fax: +31 183 690113

Cell: +31 654 323221

Email: [email protected]

Web: http://www.nefkensadvies.nl/


 Think before you print.




_______________________________________________
For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit 
www.ipexpert.com

Reply via email to