Hi Tyson,
I think that's pretty funny. I understand the frustration.
But from the regular network guy (non CCIE Instructor) POV, its a pretty
good change.

Thanks for always helping!

On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 4:43 PM, Tyson Scott <[email protected]> wrote:

>  Then the default behavior has changed.  I am not aware of when the change
> occurred.  I have noticed lately a few features working that shouldn't until
> I finished my configurations and I think some things are there by default
> without configuration but I cannot provide any further clarification as the
> results you and I are seeing are different than what is documented and I
> don't have any further insights beyond test results.
>
>
>
> For instance, I have some labs recently that I expect to cause routing
> loops due to dual points of redistribution but even without tag prevention
> or prefix filtering the labs just work.  It was frustrating when I was
> teaching an R&S bootcamp expecting to show a problem and not being able to
> reproduce a problem ;).  Even with my most notorious routing loop lab with
> 12.4(24)T no loops occur and the routing table is solid. Not very fair.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
>
>
> Tyson Scott - CCIE #13513 R&S, Security, and SP
>
> Managing Partner / Sr. Instructor - IPexpert, Inc.
>
> Mailto: [email protected]
>
> Telephone: +1.810.326.1444, ext. 208
>
> Live Assistance, Please visit: www.ipexpert.com/chat
>
> eFax: +1.810.454.0130
>
>
>
> IPexpert is a premier provider of Self-Study Workbooks, Video on Demand,
> Audio Tools, Online Hardware Rental and Classroom Training for the Cisco
> CCIE (R&S, Voice, Security & Service Provider) certification(s) with
> training locations throughout the United States, Europe, South Asia and
> Australia. Be sure to visit our online communities at
> www.ipexpert.com/communities and our public website at www.ipexpert.com
>
>
>
> *From:* Kingsley Charles [mailto:[email protected]]
> *Sent:* Monday, September 27, 2010 11:04 AM
> *To:* Tyson Scott
> *Cc:* Pieter-Jan Nefkens; [email protected]
>
> *Subject:* Re: [OSL | CCIE_Security] ESP across PAT
>
>
>
> I tried creating 2nd IPSec tunnel through the PAT router and it works fine.
> The IPSec sessions are being tracked by SPIs for each IPSec tunnel
> respectivley.
>
> Note : I have not configured the routers for *NAT Support for IPSec ESP -
> Phase II* (configuration of "ip nat service-list"  on the PAT router and
> "crypto ipsec nat-transparency spi-matching" on the IPSec endpoints)
>
>
> With regards
> Kings
>
> On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 7:46 PM, Tyson Scott <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Have you got the second tunnel up and working though yet?
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
>
>
> Tyson Scott - CCIE #13513 R&S, Security, and SP
>
> Managing Partner / Sr. Instructor - IPexpert, Inc.
>
> Mailto: [email protected]
>
> Telephone: +1.810.326.1444, ext. 208
>
> Live Assistance, Please visit: www.ipexpert.com/chat
>
> eFax: +1.810.454.0130
>
>
>
> IPexpert is a premier provider of Self-Study Workbooks, Video on Demand,
> Audio Tools, Online Hardware Rental and Classroom Training for the Cisco
> CCIE (R&S, Voice, Security & Service Provider) certification(s) with
> training locations throughout the United States, Europe, South Asia and
> Australia. Be sure to visit our online communities at
> www.ipexpert.com/communities and our public website at www.ipexpert.com
>
>
>
> *From:* Kingsley Charles [mailto:[email protected]]
> *Sent:* Monday, September 27, 2010 10:06 AM
> *To:* Pieter-Jan Nefkens
> *Cc:* Tyson Scott; [email protected]
>
>
> *Subject:* Re: [OSL | CCIE_Security] ESP across PAT
>
>
>
> Hi PJ
>
> The first link clearly explains how ICMP works with PAT using sequencial
> numbers . For ESP, the link says we need to use SPI matching using "ip nat
> service-list" command.
>
> The issue is that I observing the ESP with PAT process working using the
> SPI matching logic without configuring SPI matching configuration (NAT
> Support for IPSec ESP - Phase II. Tried reloading but I still see it working
> without configuration of "ip nat service-list"  on the PAT router and
> "crypto ipsec nat-transparency spi-matching" on the
> IPSec endpoints.
>
>
>
> With regards
> Kings
>
> On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 7:10 PM, Pieter-Jan Nefkens <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
>
>
> Actually, it should work with multiple ESP tunnels and PAT with SPI
> matching. That is a feature that is introduced in IOS 12.2-something..
>
>
>
> Check out:
>
>
>
> white paper:
>
>
>
>
> http://www.cisco.com/en/US/technologies/tk648/tk361/tk438/technologies_white_paper09186a00801af2b9.html
>
> (Search for multiple ESP through PAT)
>
>
>
> Feature guide:
>
>
> http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/ios/12_2t/12_2t15/feature/guide/ftsecnat.html#wp1057826
>
>
>
> I remember this as I was playing around with it once, and I know that at
> one time, the SPI matching was enabled automatically, I think it was with
> the 12.4T15 release (a lot of things happend then)
>
>
>
> HTH
>
>
>
> PJ
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 27 sep 2010, at 15:13, Kingsley Charles wrote:
>
>
>
>   Hi Tyson
>
>
>
> I had only one ESP tunnel. Is there any specific reason for it not to work?
> If ICMP can be PATed then ESP can also be PATed right?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> With regards
>
> Kings
>
> On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 6:39 PM, Tyson Scott <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Kingsley,
>
>
>
> Did you have more than one IPSec session going thru the router?  If it
> automatically does SPI matching that is new to me but I expect it to not
> work when you do two ESP tunnels thru the router.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
>
>
> Tyson Scott - CCIE #13513 R&S, Security, and SP
>
> Managing Partner / Sr. Instructor - IPexpert, Inc.
>
> Mailto: [email protected]
>
> Telephone: +1.810.326.1444, ext. 208
>
> Live Assistance, Please visit: www.ipexpert.com/chat
>
> eFax: +1.810.454.0130
>
>
>
> IPexpert is a premier provider of Self-Study Workbooks, Video on Demand,
> Audio Tools, Online Hardware Rental and Classroom Training for the Cisco
> CCIE (R&S, Voice, Security & Service Provider) certification(s) with
> training locations throughout the United States, Europe, South Asia and
> Australia. Be sure to visit our online communities at
> www.ipexpert.com/communities and our public website at www.ipexpert.com
>
>
>
> *From:* [email protected] [mailto:
> [email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Kingsley Charles
> *Sent:* Monday, September 27, 2010 7:53 AM
> *To:* [email protected]
> *Subject:* Re: [OSL | CCIE_Security] ESP across PAT
>
>
>
> Any thoughts?
>
> On Sat, Sep 25, 2010 at 7:24 PM, Kingsley Charles <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hi all
>
>
>
> We all know that NAT/PAT and firewall might break IPSec. We use NAT-T,
> IPSec over UDP and IPSec over TCP.
>
>
>
> Some firewall will not inspect ESP traffic hence by wrapping ESP into TCP
> or UDP would solve the porblem.
>
>
>
> Another global problem is NAT or PAT in between IPSec peers.
>
>
>
> AH won't work either with NAT or PAT as it authenticates the whole packet.
> So for now lets forget about AH.
>
>
>
> ESP doesn't authenticate the whole header and hence we can make it work
> across NAT or PAT devices.
>
>
>
> Without NAT-T, we can still have ESP across NAT devices by having the
> remote device to have peer configured as the NATed address.
>
>
>
> The interesting topic is ESP over PAT. The problem is that ESP doesn't have
> a port number. How does the PAT device translate the ESP and thus it breaks
> ESP. Here comes NAT-T which wraps ESP into UDP using port 4500 and hence PAT
> devices can translate those wrapped packets.
>
>
>
> I was trying ESP over PAT to see how does IOS breaks IPSec. But it did
> work. It tracks the translation using the ESP SPI number. I didn't have the
> IPSec
>
> peer and PAT router for "ip nat service" i.e., ESP SPI matching.
>
>
>
> Which means IOS routers doing PAT doesn't break ESP and is able to handle
> it.
>
>
>
> In the same lines, I used to wonder how IOS PAT routers handle ping across.
> The ICMP echo-request packets also doesn't have port numbers but I see IOS
> router tracking ICMP requests translations too.
>
>
>
>
>
> So when did this change happen in IOS? IOS router doing PAT doesn't break
> IPSec using ESP.
>
>
>
> Please share your thoughts
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> With regards
>
> Kings
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
>


-- 
Best Regards,

Tolulope.

<<image001.gif>>

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

Reply via email to