Timeline for OSPFv3 Authentication IPSEC SPI/Logging issues - Can you filter out logs?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 4, 2022 at 22:17 | vote | accept | Ben | ||
| Jan 4, 2022 at 22:17 | vote | accept | Ben | ||
| Jan 4, 2022 at 22:17 | |||||
| Dec 23, 2021 at 23:08 | comment | added | Ron Maupin♦ | Did any answer help you? if so, you should accept the answer so that the question does not keep popping up forever, looking for an answer. Alternatively, you could post and accept your own answer. | |
| Nov 10, 2021 at 22:15 | answer | added | Ben | timeline score: 1 | |
| Nov 10, 2021 at 17:43 | comment | added | Ricky | Cisco has gone way down hill if that's true. Traffic is traffic. If it's not your traffic there's nothing for you to do but forward it. (I've had many ipsec flows going through IOS routers without any such issues.) | |
| Nov 10, 2021 at 15:49 | comment | added | Zac67♦ | That I'd call a bug. It's definitely not a feature if you can't turn it off... | |
| Nov 10, 2021 at 15:46 | comment | added | Ben | @Zac67, no NAT. The tunnel drawing is the tunnel that the two encryption devices build between eachother over the two routers. I asked Cisco if there was a way to ignore ipsec packets not destined to the router itself, but they said there wasn't a way. | |
| Nov 10, 2021 at 15:40 | comment | added | Zac67♦ | I assume the IPSEC TUNNEL in your diagram is the virtual link that is actually tunneled across Router A & B. Imho, a router should only interpret AH or ESP packets that are addressed to one of their own, local interfaces - everything else is 'just traffic'. Is their any NAT involved? | |
| Nov 10, 2021 at 15:26 | history | asked | Ben | CC BY-SA 4.0 |