07-27-2007 08:21 AM - edited 03-03-2019 06:04 PM
I am looking at redoing our current WAN design. Right now we have VPN connections from PIX boxes to each location. As you can imagine it is very messy trying to configure tunnels to each location.
I am looking for the best solution that would help me not only configure my current sites but expand very easily as we grow. My biggest issue is that each site can have anywhere from 2 subnets to 5. So we have a lot of different IP address to pass to each location.
I was looking at GRE tunneling and am a bit confused as to how it will work. Will I still need to define access list at each location for each subnet? If so I am not sure what I gain by going that route besides some failover options.
If so is there a better way of connecting remote sites between routers?
Thanks!
07-27-2007 08:28 AM
Perhaps something like DMVPN can help ?
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/sw/iosswrel/ps1839/products_feature_guide09186a0080110ba1.html
Have a read and let us know.
07-27-2007 08:31 AM
Thanks.
I have looked at DMVPN but I was hoping to avoid using PIX boxes for the connections.
07-27-2007 08:34 AM
You don't need PIX for DMVPN, you can implement it with IOS Routers.
07-27-2007 08:32 AM
Agree with Edison, dmvpn is the next big thing. We are beginning some deployment and it looks real nice so far.
07-27-2007 08:41 AM
Thanks again.
Can I assume we can do a spooke and hub config and avoid full meshing for all sites to communicate?
All I assume it requires configuring tunnels for each and ever subnet to each location?
Thanks!
07-27-2007 09:46 AM
No you don't need to configure each subnet at tunnel level. You will use a routing protocol of your choice, and all the remote subnets will be announced and reachable from hub site without additional configuration
Find answers to your questions by entering keywords or phrases in the Search bar above. New here? Use these resources to familiarize yourself with the community: