Re: RRAS Routing Problems
- From: "Bill Grant" <not.available@online>
- Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2008 11:06:09 +1000
Hi Phillip,
With RRAS the only static routes required are the ones linked to the demand-dial interfaces. There are stored in the registry until the connection comes up. When the connection binds to the dd interfaces the routes are added to the routing table using the tunnel endpoint addresses. (You don't need to know about them in ISA because the setup wizard looks after it).
The dd interfaces are really just being used as something to bind the static routes to. You don't need to use dial on demand - you can connect manually and make the connection persistent. The static routes (the ones which route the traffic for the "other" site through the VPN link) are set up before the connection exists. The dd interfaces are really just like symbolic names. They are something to use as a name for the interface in the static route which will be replaced by the IP address when the connection is made.
So as long as the VPN router is the default gateway for each site, routing between the sites is automatic when the VPN link comes up and binds to both routers. There is only one link, but it can be activated from either end. Either router can call the other to initiate the connection.
The vital thing is that when it calls, it uses the name of the dd interface on the answering router as its username. That ensures that the dd interface becomes active and the static route is added to the routing table. If it uses some other username, the connection binds to the default internal interface (as used by a client-server VPN connection) and you only get a host route back to the calling router, not a subnet route to the machines behind the router. If this happens site to site routing fails of course.
"Phillip Windell" <philwindell@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:O79T5sU0IHA.4400@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
"Bill Grant" <not.available@online> wrote in message news:Op42GiN0IHA.4084@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.If the VPN link is up and the static routes are in place, that is perfectly reasonable. Since the two routers are linked by a point to point connection, the setup can be looked at as a simple (slow) IP router.
Yes. That is why I don't see the need to add static routes. With an IP Router there would be no static route at all. The Router (or Routers in P2P) are already aware of the segments that they are already directly connected two, so when there is only two segments there just simply would not be a static route at all. I have to trust your judgment when it comes to RRAS becuase you know it better than I do, so I am trying to understand, but I don't see any need for a static route.
--
Phillip Windell
www.wandtv.com
The views expressed, are my own and not those of my employer, or Microsoft,
or anyone else associated with me, including my cats.
-----------------------------------------------------
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: RRAS Routing Problems
- From: Phillip Windell
- Re: RRAS Routing Problems
- References:
- Re: RRAS Routing Problems
- From: Phillip Windell
- Re: RRAS Routing Problems
- From: Bill Grant
- Re: RRAS Routing Problems
- From: Phillip Windell
- Re: RRAS Routing Problems
- Prev by Date: Re: resubnetting
- Next by Date: RE: SNMP & Get-Request (unicast vs multicast)
- Previous by thread: Re: RRAS Routing Problems
- Next by thread: Re: RRAS Routing Problems
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
