Nortel has a technical paper on the "banner text" message dated December '04 and possible resolution (enable protocol 17, 50 and 51 at firewall/router, remove any other VPN client, or possibly use NAT).
I have a requirement to setup many branch office tunnels, some of which will need NAT, due to address duplication between private LANs. I can't figure out the syntax when setting up NAt on the Contivity...anybody out there have any experience with this?
We had one of summer students develop a small script that parsed the daily event logs from the VPN (Contivity), searching for all paired start and end events, based on session ID. After that, we had him develop some stanard reports based on the sorted data.
Not to start a brand name war, but we've had the most trouble with LinkSys brand routers (619, limited support of multiple IPSec seesions,...). Flip side, we've had good success with SMC.
Typically found on the host end of the VPN...in your case, if you're using a VPN client to get to the other network, their network would have the VPN host (router).
When you establish an IPSEC VPN tunnel to another network, you are binding the IP in your PC to that remote network, locking out your local network...unless you expressly tell the VPN that you will allow split tunnelling (network capabilities in the reverse direction). Be careful with this...it...
<what do you mean exactly by remote control solution? >
Either remote controlling a desktop that desides on the corporate network (VNC,...), or remote controlling a session that is local to the network (Citrix, Windows remote desktop,...).
Our experience with bi-directional satellite and VPN has been the same...there just seems to be too much chatter and handshakes, possibly due to the 700+ ms latency of satellite connections(?). An SSL or remote control solution proved to work best over satellite.
One of our users is having problems connecting to the corporate network via Contivity VPN, using a wireless lan connection installed on the laptop. The wired Ethernet connection works fine through the VPN, but when he tries to use the wireless, he gets connected, but that's it. No drive...
W2rus,
On the 192.168.0.0 side you should somewhere within your VPN setup be defining the remote 192.168.1.0 network ... likely in the same area where you defined the remote public side. Vise-versa is true for the opposite direction. Are these devices directly connected or are there any...
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.