Thread Info
  • State Verified Answer
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 5 replies
  • Subscribers 27 subscribers
  • Views 5973 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
Suggested
This discussion has been locked.
You can no longer post new replies to this discussion. If you have a question you can start a new discussion

UTM RED TO XG TUNNEL

Arvin Carlos

Hello,

 

Is the UTM to XG tunnel using RED tunnel is now officially supported?...can someone send me some support/help links please...



This thread was automatically locked due to age.
Parents
  • 0

    Hi,

    it is supported. What product causes your problem? 

    Basically you have to build up the Server - Client config with RED and build up the tunnel.

    Works fine on my appliances. 

  • 0 in reply to LuCar Toni

    I'm preparing and planning  the deployment of SG105  to XF210 RED tunnel  as of now...I will post the update soon.... any suggestion...which is better and easy to manage?...  SG TO XG using RED Tunnel or SG TO XG  IPSEC Tunnel using IKE1?....

  • +1 in reply to Arvin Carlos

    Both works fine. 

    There are limitations in RED VPN XG with policy based routing, but nevertheless everything else should work.

    Which protocol you should use depends on the performance, you want to archive. 

  • 0 in reply to LuCar Toni

    Thank you...I'm positive to go for IPSEC, since it is fully documented on the knowledgebase.

  • 0 in reply to LuCar Toni

    Hi,

     

    I am trying the IPSEC and this error logged on the UTM, any suggestion?

     

    7:02-08:36:50 ryad-utm pluto[27818]: "S_SG_TO_XG" #1: received Vendor ID payload [XAUTH]
    2018:07:02-08:36:50 ryad-utm pluto[27818]: "S_SG_TO_XG" #1: received Vendor ID payload [Dead Peer Detection]
    2018:07:02-08:36:50 ryad-utm pluto[27818]: "S_SG_TO_XG" #1: ignoring Vendor ID payload [Cisco-Unity]
    2018:07:02-08:36:50 ryad-utm pluto[27818]: "S_SG_TO_XG" #1: received Vendor ID payload [RFC 3947]
    2018:07:02-08:36:50 ryad-utm pluto[27818]: "S_SG_TO_XG" #1: enabling possible NAT-traversal with method 3
    2018:07:02-08:36:50 ryad-utm pluto[27818]: "S_SG_TO_XG" #1: NAT-Traversal: Result using RFC 3947: i am NATed
    2018:07:02-08:36:50 ryad-utm pluto[27818]: "S_SG_TO_XG" #1: next payload type of ISAKMP Hash Payload has an unknown value: 116
    2018:07:02-08:36:50 ryad-utm pluto[27818]: "S_SG_TO_XG" #1: malformed payload in packet
    2018:07:02-08:37:00 ryad-utm pluto[27818]: "S_SG_TO_XG" #1: next payload type of ISAKMP Hash Payload has an unknown value: 74
    2018:07:02-08:37:00 ryad-utm pluto[27818]: "S_SG_TO_XG" #1: malformed payload in packet
Reply
  • 0 in reply to LuCar Toni

    Hi,

     

    I am trying the IPSEC and this error logged on the UTM, any suggestion?

     

    7:02-08:36:50 ryad-utm pluto[27818]: "S_SG_TO_XG" #1: received Vendor ID payload [XAUTH]
    2018:07:02-08:36:50 ryad-utm pluto[27818]: "S_SG_TO_XG" #1: received Vendor ID payload [Dead Peer Detection]
    2018:07:02-08:36:50 ryad-utm pluto[27818]: "S_SG_TO_XG" #1: ignoring Vendor ID payload [Cisco-Unity]
    2018:07:02-08:36:50 ryad-utm pluto[27818]: "S_SG_TO_XG" #1: received Vendor ID payload [RFC 3947]
    2018:07:02-08:36:50 ryad-utm pluto[27818]: "S_SG_TO_XG" #1: enabling possible NAT-traversal with method 3
    2018:07:02-08:36:50 ryad-utm pluto[27818]: "S_SG_TO_XG" #1: NAT-Traversal: Result using RFC 3947: i am NATed
    2018:07:02-08:36:50 ryad-utm pluto[27818]: "S_SG_TO_XG" #1: next payload type of ISAKMP Hash Payload has an unknown value: 116
    2018:07:02-08:36:50 ryad-utm pluto[27818]: "S_SG_TO_XG" #1: malformed payload in packet
    2018:07:02-08:37:00 ryad-utm pluto[27818]: "S_SG_TO_XG" #1: next payload type of ISAKMP Hash Payload has an unknown value: 74
    2018:07:02-08:37:00 ryad-utm pluto[27818]: "S_SG_TO_XG" #1: malformed payload in packet
Children
No Data