Hi all, I might have painted myself into a corner here, so I'm here looking for options from people far cleverer than I.
Firstly, a bit of history. We're using J6350s, and SRX650s, as "security devices on a stick". Our Ms and MXs punt packets into a routing instance on the "security devices" with firewall filters. Those routing instances purposely only use the most basic of static routes possible (10/8, 192.168/16, etc), so we can be certain what zones packets pass through so the policies match. That all works fine. We're also centralising our inter-site IPSec onto the Js and SRXs, but need OSPF there, so have a second routing-instance and a partial mesh of routed tunnels between them. Still, all good. Offices and what-not have tunnels tied directly to the IPSec routing-instances and OSPF metrics keep traffic flows sane. All hunky dory. Now the problem. I need to take traffic from servers behind an M/MX have it policy'd by the "security" routing instance, then encrypted by the IPSec routing-instance. If I punt traffic into "security", let it come back to the router, then punt it back into "ipsec", everything works as expected. However each packet has to pass across the M/MX<->J/SRX link 4 times, in out, in out. Shake it all about. Obviously this would be better if we could shortcut the M/MX step in the middle and move packets from "security" to "ipsec", and "ipsec" to "security" directly. As "security" doesn't run OSPF/BGP/ISIS/etc adding a static route "next-table ipsec.inet.0" is fine. "ipsec" *does* run OSPF though, so I need to do FBF to override that. I've tried a "then routing-instance security" filter applied on output on the interface facing the M/MX, but my traffic get lost somewhere. Security policies from 'input-ipsec-zone' to 'output-security-zone' were added. I'm wondering if 'moving' packets from routing-instance to routing-instance on a flow-mode device simply screws up security policies. As one of the input or output interface don't exist in the routing-instance. So I figured *routing* packets from routing-instance to routing-instance would be better. Time for some logical tunnels! J-series devices don't support logical tunnels though. Argh! -- Mike Williams _______________________________________________ juniper-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
