Most of the routers I have worked with in the past have 2 different way to configure

a Router to Router VPN Manual and Automatic(IKE).  The Manual

option allows for putting in the Keys, SPI and some other stuff.  I have used the manual IPsec VPNs because they are more reliable then IKE because on some routers IKE seems to die at the drop of a hat or not reestablish the connection.  I don't see an option in this router for that. Why?

Thanks

Tyler

Seems like this router being a small router allows only the basic configuration steps for VPN to choose the parameters for each phase only.

Just check under key management, there's a key exchange method (Auto IKE), check what options you have there.

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/ps9923/products_qanda_item09186a0080a36603.shtml

Federico.

Yes I have checked that.  It is a drop down which seems odd because only IKE(AUTO) is listed making me think something else should be there if not why have a drop down.  Granted this is a basic router but IPSec support like router specs states are supposed to be included and not including part of the compents of IPSec is wrong.  I am starting to see more and more routers coming out with junk interfaces that don't give half the options that users should have in an interface.  If the options are to advanced then say that in the spec (WE DON'T FULLY SUPPORT IPSEC).  I am really hoping I am missing some option because I will be returning this router otherwise due to the false advertising in the specifications because it doesn't fully support IPSec.

Tyler

I see your point and understand it.

However is interesting because I've done always automatic IKE and never run into unstability problems (at least not due to IKE).

I imagine that if you establish an automatic IKE tunnel it will work, but obviously you're loofing for a manual IKE configuration.

May I ask which device is going to be on the other end of the tunnel?

Federico.

I have run and still do run links with IKE and some links work better then others but it seems to depend on the quality of the link which is the main draw back I have seen on a number of occasions IKE not being able to deal with the connection properly and not bringing the VPN link back up.  I would consider that a major draw back in the implementation.  My problem currently is with the other side of the VPN that is running a Symantec 360 router and as of yet I have not been able to get the VPN tunnel to establish using IKE.  I have tried multiple configurations none of which have been successful.  The Symantec router is about 5-6 years old and they don't make them anymore but are stable routers.  I have been trying to find other routers that can be used as a replacement for the branch locations that are currently running these Symantec units and the WRV210 looked to be a good little router for that job.  I guess I was wrong about that.  Don't mind spending more money just figured if this had the options along with Wireless it was a really good by and since it is supposed to be a cisco product figured it would be better then most.  But of course the lines have been blurring between Cisco and Linksys devices and I suspect this is actually a linksys device with the Cisco interfacec and Cisco out casing mean while it is actually a linksys product.  Don't get me wrong I don't mind Linksys I have a few RV042's in operation right now and they are stable but the wireless g/n has never been 100% as far as function goes.

Anyway I will probably be returning this router due to the lack of options for VPN it has and getting something different if I can't get this VPN connection running.