Can you remove the ISAKMP profile attached to the crypto map and give a try.



With regards
Kings

On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 7:54 AM, Eugene Pefti <[email protected]>wrote:

>  I tried it with pre-shared keys before switching to certificates and it
> worked ;)
>
> That’s my point. I don’t understand what could be wrong with certificates.
> After going through all authentication routines and confirming that the
> transform set is acceptable router R3 bails out with IPSec policy
> invalidation error.
>
>
>
> Mar 22 17:58:56: ISAKMP:(1041):Checking IPSec proposal 1
>
> Mar 22 17:58:56: ISAKMP: transform 1, ESP_3DES
>
> Mar 22 17:58:56: ISAKMP:   attributes in transform:
>
> Mar 22 17:58:56: ISAKMP:      SA life type in seconds
>
> Mar 22 17:58:56: ISAKMP:      SA life duration (basic) of 28800
>
> Mar 22 17:58:56: ISAKMP:      SA life type in kilobytes
>
> Mar 22 17:58:56: ISAKMP:      SA life duration (VPI) of  0x0 0x46 0x50 0x0
>
> Mar 22 17:58:56: ISAKMP:      encaps is 1 (Tunnel)
>
> Mar 22 17:58:56: ISAKMP:      authenticator is HMAC-MD5
>
> Mar 22 17:58:56: ISAKMP:(1041):atts are acceptable.
>
> Mar 22 17:58:56: ISAKMP:(1041): IPSec policy invalidated proposal with
> error 32
>
> Mar 22 17:58:56: ISAKMP:(1041): phase 2 SA policy not acceptable! (local
> 192.168.6.3 remote 192.168.6.200)
>
>
>
> And why it works vice-versa ? When I send traffic from behind the router
> everything is just OK.
>
>
>
> *From:* Bruno [mailto:[email protected]]
> *Sent:* 22 March 2011 19:15
> *To:* Eugene Pefti
> *Cc:* Tyson Scott; [email protected]
>
> *Subject:* Re: [OSL | CCIE_Security] IPSec site-to-site VPN tunnel with
> RSA certificates, help please !
>
>
>
> I ain't got time to see the files yet but did you try to convert this to
> pre-shared key on both devices without changing any other parameters to see
> what happens?
>
> If it works, your certificates and trustpoints are not working. Otherwise,
> you know that nothing with certifications are bad
>
> On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 10:07 PM, Eugene Pefti <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> The time stamps in the debug was different because “service  timestamps
> debug” was not set to local time (at least on the router)
>
> I attached two outputs of “debug crypto isakmp” run on both devices
> simultaneously.
>
> I don’t understand why R3 router reports that it can’t accept SA policy –
> “phase 2 SA policy not acceptable”.
>
> They are configured identically in terms of isakmp and ipsec policies.
>
> And yes, ASA stops at sending message 2 of Quick Mode.
>
>
>
> Eugene
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Tyson Scott [mailto:[email protected]]
> *Sent:* 22 March 2011 17:07
> *To:* Eugene Pefti; 'Bruno'
>
>
> *Cc:* [email protected]
>
> *Subject:* RE: [OSL | CCIE_Security] IPSec site-to-site VPN tunnel with
> RSA certificates, help please !
>
>
>
> According to you first debug on the ASA it is failing MSG2, not getting a
> reply from the router
>
> Mar 21 21:08:37 [IKEv1 DEBUG]: Group = 192.168.6.3, IP = 192.168.6.3, IKE
> QM Initiator FSM error history (struct &0xccf3edb0)  <state>, <event>:
> QM_DONE, EV_ERROR-->QM_WAIT_MSG2, EV_TIMEOUT-->QM_WAIT_MSG2,
> NullEvent-->QM_SND_MSG1, EV_SND_MSG-->QM_SND_MSG1,
> EV_START_TMR-->QM_SND_MSG1, EV_RESEND_MSG-->QM_WAIT_MSG2, 
> EV_TIMEOUT-->QM_WAIT_MSG2,
> NullEvent
>
> But this has a very different time stamp then the second debug.  Is time
> synchronized.  You are using certificates so that is very important. If it
> is then let's see the debug of both at the same time.
>
>
>
> 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 *Eugene Pefti
> *Sent:* Tuesday, March 22, 2011 1:37 PM
> *To:* Bruno
> *Cc:* [email protected]
> *Subject:* Re: [OSL | CCIE_Security] IPSec site-to-site VPN tunnel with
> RSA certificates, help please !
>
>
>
> These ones are the latest
>
>
>
> *From:* Bruno [mailto:[email protected]]
> *Sent:* 22 March 2011 12:34
> *To:* Eugene Pefti
> *Subject:* Re: [OSL | CCIE_Security] IPSec site-to-site VPN tunnel with
> RSA certificates, help please !
>
>
>
> I don't think you need it.
> What have you got under isakmp profile? Can you post both full config from
> ASA and router? The router's debug messages are clearer than ASA's one
>
> On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 2:32 PM, Eugene Pefti <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> This is what I’ve got for tunnel-group on ASA:
>
>
>
> tunnel-group 192.168.6.3 type ipsec-l2l
>
> tunnel-group 192.168.6.3 ipsec-attributes
>
> peer-id-validate cert
>
> trust-point CA1
>
>
>
> At some point I was thinking to add “chain” command to enable the ASA send
> certificate chain. Found a reference to it in one of ASA books.
>
> Yusuf’s lab doesn’t have it though.
>
>
>
> *From:* Bruno [mailto:[email protected]]
> *Sent:* Tuesday, March 22, 2011 6:28 AM
> *To:* Eugene Pefti
> *Cc:* [email protected]
> *Subject:* Re: [OSL | CCIE_Security] IPSec site-to-site VPN tunnel with
> RSA certificates, help please !
>
>
>
> what did you configure under tunnel-group?
>
> On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 2:19 AM, Eugene Pefti <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> Hello folks,
>
> I’m at the point of questioning my sanity while doing this task.
>
> The design is very simple:
>
>
>
> Host1 ------- ASA--------Router--------Host2
>
>
>
> ASA and Router are IPSec VPN gateways, enrolled with CA and got their
> certificates.
>
> Trying to make the router check two attributes in the ASA certificate by
> the certificate map.
>
>
>
> My problem is that when I initiate the traffic from Host1 I the tunnel goes
> up but there’s no traffic. I see that main mode has been completed:
>
>
>
> ASA1(config)# sh crypto isa sa
>
>
>
> 1   IKE Peer: 192.168.6.3
>
>     Type    : L2L             Role    : initiator
>
>     Rekey   : no              State   : MM_ACTIVE
>
>
>
> But there are no ipsec sa.
>
>
>
> On the other hand, when I initiate traffic from Host2 the tunnel
> successfully comes up, ipsec sa are established and Host2 can reach Host1
>
>
>
> I noticed that it takes a lot more time to see anything on the ASA while
> debugging isakmp, “pitcher: received a key acquire message” shows a number
> of times and then I see that Quick Mode can’t be constructed.
>
>
>
> “debug crypto isakmp 200” run on ASA
>
> =================================================================
>
> Mar 21 21:08:06 [IKEv1 DEBUG]: Pitcher: received a key acquire message, spi
> 0x0
>
> Mar 21 21:08:08 [IKEv1 DEBUG]: Pitcher: received a key acquire message, spi
> 0x0
>
> Mar 21 21:08:10 [IKEv1 DEBUG]: Pitcher: received a key acquire message, spi
> 0x0
>
> Mar 21 21:08:12 [IKEv1 DEBUG]: Pitcher: received a key acquire message, spi
> 0x0
>
> Mar 21 21:08:14 [IKEv1 DEBUG]: Pitcher: received a key acquire message, spi
> 0x0
>
> Mar 21 21:08:16 [IKEv1 DEBUG]: Pitcher: received a key acquire message, spi
> 0x0
>
> Mar 21 21:08:18 [IKEv1 DEBUG]: Pitcher: received a key acquire message, spi
> 0x0
>
> Mar 21 21:08:20 [IKEv1 DEBUG]: Pitcher: received a key acquire message, spi
> 0x0
>
> Mar 21 21:08:22 [IKEv1 DEBUG]: Pitcher: received a key acquire message, spi
> 0x0
>
> Mar 21 21:08:37 [IKEv1]: Group = 192.168.6.3, IP = 192.168.6.3, QM FSM
> error (P2 struct &0xccf3edb0, mess id 0xc2b8e870)!
>
> Mar 21 21:08:37 [IKEv1 DEBUG]: Group = 192.168.6.3, IP = 192.168.6.3, IKE
> QM Initiator FSM error history (struct &0xccf3edb0)  <state>, <event>:
> QM_DONE, EV_ERROR-->QM_WAIT_MSG2, EV_TIMEOUT-->QM_WAIT_MSG2,
> NullEvent-->QM_SND_MSG1, EV_SND_MSG-->QM_SND_MSG1,
> EV_START_TMR-->QM_SND_MSG1, EV_RESEND_MSG-->QM_WAIT_MSG2,
> EV_TIMEOUT-->QM_WAIT_MSG2, NullEvent
>
> Mar 21 21:08:37 [IKEv1 DEBUG]: Group = 192.168.6.3, IP = 192.168.6.3,
> sending delete/delete with reason message
>
> Mar 21 21:08:37 [IKEv1 DEBUG]: Group = 192.168.6.3, IP = 192.168.6.3,
> constructing blank hash payload
>
> Mar 21 21:08:37 [IKEv1 DEBUG]: Group = 192.168.6.3, IP = 192.168.6.3,
> constructing IPSec delete payload
>
> Mar 21 21:08:37 [IKEv1 DEBUG]: Group = 192.168.6.3, IP = 192.168.6.3,
> constructing qm hash payload
>
> Mar 21 21:08:37 [IKEv1]: IP = 192.168.6.3, IKE_DECODE SENDING Message
> (msgid=2f605835) with payloads : HDR + HASH (8) + DELETE (12) + NONE (0)
> total length : 64
>
> Mar 21 21:08:37 [IKEv1 DEBUG]: Group = 192.168.6.3, IP = 192.168.6.3, IKE
> Deleting SA: Remote Proxy 192.168.5.0, Local Proxy 192.168.4.0
>
> Mar 21 21:08:37 [IKEv1]: Group = 192.168.6.3, IP = 192.168.6.3, Removing
> peer from correlator table failed, no match!
>
> Mar 21 21:08:37 [IKEv1 DEBUG]: Group = 192.168.6.3, IP = 192.168.6.3, IKE
> SA MM:c3ed91f7 rcv'd Terminate: state MM_ACTIVE  flags 0x0000c062, refcnt 1,
> tuncnt 0
>
> Mar 21 21:08:37 [IKEv1 DEBUG]: Group = 192.168.6.3, IP = 192.168.6.3, IKE
> SA MM:c3ed91f7 terminating:  flags 0x0100c022, refcnt 0, tuncnt 0
>
> Mar 21 21:08:37 [IKEv1 DEBUG]: Group = 192.168.6.3, IP = 192.168.6.3,
> sending delete/delete with reason message
>
> Mar 21 21:08:37 [IKEv1 DEBUG]: Group = 192.168.6.3, IP = 192.168.6.3,
> constructing blank hash payload
>
> Mar 21 21:08:37 [IKEv1 DEBUG]: Group = 192.168.6.3, IP = 192.168.6.3,
> constructing IKE delete payload
>
> Mar 21 21:08:37 [IKEv1 DEBUG]: Group = 192.168.6.3, IP = 192.168.6.3,
> constructing qm hash payload
>
> Mar 21 21:08:37 [IKEv1]: IP = 192.168.6.3, IKE_DECODE SENDING Message
> (msgid=e67eb622) with payloads : HDR + HASH (8) + DELETE (12) + NONE (0)
> total length : 76
>
> Mar 21 21:08:37 [IKEv1 DEBUG]: Pitcher: received key delete msg, spi
> 0x43b5a2b0
>
> Mar 21 21:08:37 [IKEv1]: Group = 192.168.6.3, IP = 192.168.6.3, Session is
> being torn down. Reason: Lost Service
>
> Mar 21 21:08:37 [IKEv1]: Ignoring msg to mark SA with dsID 118784 dead
> because SA deleted
>
> Mar 21 21:08:37 [IKEv1]: IP = 192.168.6.3, Received encrypted packet with
> no matching SA, dropping
>
> ====================================================================
>
>
>
> Now my question is if it has to do with ipsec proposals then why it works
> from Host2 ? I would understand that authentication phase completes and two
> peers establish isakmp tunnel in both cases.
>
>
>
> This is what I see on the router when debugging isakmp while sending
> traffic from Host1
>
>
>
> ====================================================================
>
>
>
> Mar 22 05:12:32.843: ISAKMP:(1028):Input = IKE_MESG_INTERNAL,
> IKE_PHASE1_COMPLETE
>
> Mar 22 05:12:32.843: ISAKMP:(1028):Old State = IKE_P1_COMPLETE  New State =
> IKE_P1_COMPLETE
>
>
>
> Mar 22 05:12:32.851: ISAKMP (1028): received packet from 192.168.6.200
> dport 500 sport 500 Global (R) QM_IDLE
>
> Mar 22 05:12:32.851: ISAKMP: set new node -3974482 to QM_IDLE
>
> Mar 22 05:12:32.851: ISAKMP:(1028): processing HASH payload. message ID =
> -3974482
>
> Mar 22 05:12:32.851: ISAKMP:(1028): processing SA payload. message ID =
> -3974482
>
> Mar 22 05:12:32.851: ISAKMP:(1028):Checking IPSec proposal 1
>
> Mar 22 05:12:32.851: ISAKMP: transform 1, ESP_3DES
>
> Mar 22 05:12:32.851: ISAKMP:   attributes in transform:
>
> Mar 22 05:12:32.851: ISAKMP:      SA life type in seconds
>
> Mar 22 05:12:32.851: ISAKMP:      SA life duration (basic) of 28800
>
> Mar 22 05:12:32.851: ISAKMP:      SA life type in kilobytes
>
> Mar 22 05:12:32.851: ISAKMP:      SA life duration (VPI) of  0x0 0x46 0x50
> 0x0
>
> Mar 22 05:12:32.855: ISAKMP:      encaps is 1 (Tunnel)
>
> Mar 22 05:12:32.855: ISAKMP:      authenticator is HMAC-MD5
>
> Mar 22 05:12:32.855: ISAKMP:(1028):atts are acceptable.
>
> Mar 22 05:12:32.855: ISAKMP:(1028): IPSec policy invalidated proposal with
> error 32
>
> Mar 22 05:12:32.855: ISAKMP:(1028): phase 2 SA policy not acceptable!
> (local 192.168.6.3 remote 192.168.6.200)
>
> Mar 22 05:12:32.855: ISAKMP: set new node 363315004 to QM_IDLE
>
> Mar 22 05:12:32.855: ISAKMP:(1028):Sending NOTIFY PROPOSAL_NOT_CHOSEN
> protocol 3
>
>         spi 1173572576, message ID = 363315004
>
> Mar 22 05:12:32.855: ISAKMP:(1028): sending packet to 192.168.6.200 my_port
> 500 peer_port 500 (R) QM_IDLE
>
> Mar 22 05:12:32.855: ISAKMP:(1028):Sending an IKE IPv4 Packet.
>
> Mar 22 05:12:32.855: ISAKMP:(1028):purging node 363315004
>
> Mar 22 05:12:32.855: ISAKMP:(1028):deleting node -3974482 error TRUE reason
> "QM rejected"
>
> =======================================================================
>
>
>
> If it has to do with crypto ACL then they are mirrored as they should be:
>
>
>
> Router: access-list 111 permit ip 192.168.5.0 0.0.0.255 192.168.4.0
> 0.0.0.255
>
> ASA: access-list 111 extended permit ip 192.168.4.0 255.255.255.0
> 192.168.5.0 255.255.255.0
>
>
>
> ASA1(config)# sh run crypto map
>
> crypto map MAP1 10 match address 111
>
> crypto map MAP1 10 set peer 192.168.6.3
>
> crypto map MAP1 10 set transform-set ESP-3DES-MD5
>
> crypto map MAP1 10 set trustpoint CA1
>
> crypto map MAP1 interface outside
>
>
>
> crypto map MAP1 10 ipsec-isakmp
>
>  set peer 192.168.6.200
>
> set transform-set ESP-3DES-MD5
>
>  set isakmp-profile ISAKMP-PROFILE
>
> match address 111
>
> crypto map MAP1
>
>
>
> Help please !!!
>
>
>
> Eugene
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please
> visit www.ipexpert.com
>
>
>
>
> --
> Bruno Fagioli (by Jaunty Jackalope)
> Cisco Security Professional
>
>
>
>
> --
> Bruno Fagioli (by Jaunty Jackalope)
> Cisco Security Professional
>
>
>
>
> --
> Bruno Fagioli (by Jaunty Jackalope)
> Cisco Security Professional
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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

Reply via email to