Booches.nl

Policy NAT on Cisco router

A colleague of mine had to implement an IPSec VPN tunnel from a customer to a supplier. The customer has a Cisco router for connecting to the Internet, so nothing special. The router is already setup and in production. Configuring an extra IPSec VPN tunnel isn’t very hard, the most important part is the negotiation of Phase 1 and Phase 2 credentials for the IPSec VPN connection.

This particular situation was different, because the customer has to NAT his local IP addresses into the VPN tunnel. I don’t actual configure this quiet often on routers, but more on firewalls. I setup a testing environment with GNS3 to do my own configuration.

The testing environment is displayed below. When connecting from the LAN from R1 (10.1.1.0/24) to the Internet normal NAT overload in configured. In the picture the network behind R3 represents the Internet. When connecting from R1 to R2, the source IP address (Inside Local) is translated to an address from the pool 10.22.44.0/24 (Inside Global). There is also a static NAT mapping for IP address 10.1.1.222 into the VPN tunnel (10.22.44.222).

At first I configured the environment like showed above. I configured the different interfaces and the corresponding IP addresses. Router R1 and R2 use router R3 as default gateway. The configuration of the specific routers is attached at the end of the post.

The first snippet shows the necessary NAT configuration on R1 for the Internet connection.

interface Loopback0
description INSIDE
ip address 10.1.1.1 255.255.255.0
ip nat inside
!
interface FastEthernet0/0

description OUTSIDE
ip address 212.123.212.9 255.255.255.248
ip nat outside
duplex auto
speed auto

!
ip nat inside source list ACL-NAT interface FastEthernet0/0 overload
ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 212.123.212.11
!
ip access-list extended ACL-NAT
permit ip 10.1.1.0 0.0.0.255 any

When trying to ping Lo0 on router R3, I see the following NAT table on router R1.

R1#ping 192.168.3.1 source lo0

Type escape sequence to abort.
Sending 5, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 192.168.3.1, timeout is 2 seconds:
Packet sent with a source address of 10.1.1.1
!!!!!
Success rate is 100 percent (5/5), round-trip min/avg/max = 32/46/76 ms
R1#sh ip nat translations
Pro Inside global      Inside local       Outside local      Outside global
icmp 212.123.212.9:3   10.1.1.1:3         192.168.3.1:3      192.168.3.1:3

This proves that regular NAT overloading works perfectly with the current configuration. Next I configured the Policy IPSec VPN between routers R1 and R2. The configuration isn’t that spectacular, you should pay attention to the NAT statements and ACL statements. I even configured reverse route injection for the LAN network of R2. When enabling reverse route injection a route with the remote network (172.16.2.0) pops up in the routing table. This feature can be used when redistributing static routes into a routing protocol like EIGRP.

Next I will show some snippets, with some comments, of the configuration of router R1.

\\ Specifying the Phase I and Phase II properties for the IPSec VPN

crypto isakmp policy 10
encr aes 256
authentication pre-share
group 5
crypto isakmp key VPN@Booches address 212.123.212.10
!
crypto ipsec transform-set VPN-TS esp-aes 256 esp-sha-hmac
!
crypto map CM-VPN-R2 10 ipsec-isakmp
set peer 212.123.212.10
set transform-set VPN-TS
match address VPN-R2
reverse-route

!

\\ Loopback interface with 2 IP addresses for testing purposes

\\ Secondary IP address is used for static policy NAT testing

interface Loopback0
ip address 10.1.1.222 255.255.255.0 secondary
ip address 10.1.1.1 255.255.255.0
ip nat inside

!

\\ Outside interface with the crypto map applied to this interface
interface FastEthernet0/0
description OUTSIDE
ip address 212.123.212.9 255.255.255.248
ip nat outside
duplex auto
speed auto
crypto map CM-VPN-R2

!

ip nat translation timeout 30

\\ NAT pool for dynamic policy NATZ
ip nat pool LAN-R2 10.22.44.1 10.22.44.254 netmask 255.255.255.0

\\ Default NAT for regular Internet related traffic
ip nat inside source list ACL-NAT interface FastEthernet0/0 overload

\\ NAT statement for dynamic policy NAT and static policy NAT
ip nat inside source list ACL-POLICY-NAT pool LAN-R2 overload
ip nat inside source static 10.1.1.222 10.22.44.222 route-map RM-STATIC-NAT extendable

!

\\ ACL to define traffic to be NATted for regular Internet related traffic

ip access-list extended ACL-NAT
deny   ip 10.1.1.0 0.0.0.255 172.16.2.0 0.0.0.255
deny   ip 10.22.44.0 0.0.0.255 172.16.2.0 0.0.0.255
permit ip 10.1.1.0 0.0.0.255 any

\\ ACL to define traffic to be dynamic policy NATted into IPSec VPN tunnel
ip access-list extended ACL-POLICY-NAT

deny   ip host 10.1.1.222 172.16.2.0 0.0.0.255
permit ip 10.1.1.0 0.0.0.255 172.16.2.0 0.0.0.255

\\ ACL to define traffic to be static policy NATted into IPSec VPN tunnel
ip access-list extended ACL-STATIC-POLICY-NAT
permit ip host 10.1.1.222 172.16.2.0 0.0.0.255

\\ ACL to define interesting traffic for the IPSec VPN tunnel
ip access-list extended VPN-R2
permit ip 10.22.44.0 0.0.0.255 172.16.2.0 0.0.0.255
!

\\ Route map static to configure static policy NAT statement
route-map RM-STATIC-NAT permit 10
match ip address ACL-STATIC-POLICY-NAT

I issued some ping commands and looked at the IP NAT Translations table to test the environment. The test results are displayed below.

SOURCE 10.1.1.1 (R1) – DESTINATION 172.16.2.1 (R2) & 212.123.212 (R3)

R1#ping 172.16.2.1 source 10.1.1.1
Packet sent with a source address of 10.1.1.1
!!!!!
Success rate is 100 percent (5/5), round-trip min/avg/max = 28/52/120 ms
R1#ping 212.123.212.11 source 10.1.1.1
Packet sent with a source address of 10.1.1.1
!!!!!
Success rate is 100 percent (5/5), round-trip min/avg/max = 16/48/84 ms
R1#show ip nat translations
Pro Inside global      Inside local       Outside local      Outside global
icmp 212.123.212.9:29  10.1.1.1:29        212.123.212.11:29  212.123.212.11:29
icmp 10.22.44.1:28     10.1.1.1:28        172.16.2.1:28      172.16.2.1:28

SOURCE 10.1.1.222 (R1) – DESTINATION 172.16.2.1 (R2) & 212.123.212 (R3)

R1#ping 172.16.2.1 source 10.1.1.222
Packet sent with a source address of 10.1.1.222
!!!!!
Success rate is 100 percent (5/5), round-trip min/avg/max = 8/48/84 ms
R1#ping 192.168.3.1 source 10.1.1.222
Packet sent with a source address of 10.1.1.222
!!!!!
Success rate is 100 percent (5/5), round-trip min/avg/max = 32/44/60 ms
R1#sh ip nat translation
Pro Inside global      Inside local       Outside local      Outside global
icmp 212.123.212.9:37  10.1.1.222:37      192.168.3.1:37     192.168.3.1:37
icmp 10.22.44.222:36   10.1.1.222:36      172.16.2.1:36      172.16.2.1:36

 

SOURCE 172.16.2.1 (R2) – DESTINATION 10.22.44.222 (R1)

R2#ping 10.22.44.222 source 172.16.2.1

Packet sent with a source address of 172.16.2.1
!!!!!
Success rate is 100 percent (5/5), round-trip min/avg/max = 4/53/112 ms

All ICMP testing gave positive results and policy-based NAT on the Cisco router is working perfectly.

Configurations:

• Router R1
• Router R2
• Router R3

Automatic Log In Reverse Proxy with FBA

Recently I configured another ISA 2006 server as reverse proxy to publish the Exchange 2007 OWA environment on a secure way to the internet. The customer where I configured the reverse proxy is migrating from Novell GroupWise to Microsoft Exchange.

During the migration period, the customer has specific requirements when connecting to the webmail environment from the internet. The customer is using GroupWise and OWA next to each other. He build an own log in page for webmail. The user enters this credentials, which are check against a directory with the help of LDAP. Depending on the LDAP group the user is member of, he is redirected to GroupWise webmail or OWA.

The problem was that when the client gets redirected to OWA, he had to provide his credentials a second time to log in to OWA. The customer wants to use Single Sign On, so the user credentials should be automatically posted on the OWA sign in page. The customer has the option to edit his own sign in page, so specific parameters can be added when redirecting the client to the ISA 2006 reverse proxy.

I had to figure out, which URL is posted to the ISA reverse proxy after the user credentials are entered in the web browser. I started to search the internet and different forums, but the solution wasn’t found. So there was nothing else left, than starting the good old sniffer and capture the complete process. I always use WireShark as sniffer, which is a very powerful tool. I added a filter so only the traffic to and from the ISA 2006 server is captured.

I started the sniffer, logged in on the ISA 2006 server, stopped the sniffer and started analyzing the sniffer results. After some digging I found the POST statement, which is displayed below.

Looking at the POST statements, I now knew the exact URL which is posted to the ISA 2006 server. I copied the URL to notepad, changed the username and password to another account. Copied the new URL and pasted that one in my browser and HIEHOE. After hitting enter, I don’t get any sign in page, but get directly to my webmail. So exactly as the customer wants.

The default POST URL has the following format:

https://<DNS name>/CookieAuth.dll?Logon?curl=Z2Fowa&flags=0&forcedownlevel=0& formdir=1&trusted=0&username=<username>&password=<password>
&SubmitCreds=Log+On

Policy-Based Routing Catalyst 3560

Today I visited a customer where the power a Cisco Catalyst 3548XL blew up. The switch had a manufacture date of December 2000. It is an old one, but still I haven’t seen a power supply being blown up from a Cisco switch from that age.

But oké, the switch needed to be replaced. The customer ordered some 3560 switches, so all the 3548 switches could be replaced. The customer was also using a Cisco 2650XL router for routing between the different VLAN’s. Because they purchased some layer 3 switches, I also wanted to remove the Cisco 2650XL router.

The configuration of the router wasn’t that spectacular, there was only some policy-based routing (PBR) configured. The switches had IP base images, so I had to upgrade one switch with IP services firmware. After upgrading the switch, I configured the ACL and route-map as listed below.

ip access-list extended ACL-PBR
permit ip 10.10.10.0 0.0.0.255 any

!

route-map RM-PBR permit 10
match ip address ACL-PBR
set ip default next-hop 10.10.10.253

Next I wanted to apply the route-map to the correct interface, but that resultant in the following syslog message.

%PLATFORM_PBR-4-SDM_MISMATCH: PBR requires sdm template routing

Looking at the internet for a PBR example on a Cisco Catalyst 3560, I found that I had to change the SDM (Switch Database Management) template. The SDM manages the layer 2 and layer 3 switching information that is maintained in the Ternary Content Addressable Memory (TCAM). The TCAM is used for forwarding lookups.

Looking at the default configuration the switch had the following SDM configuration.

SW01-L3(config)#do sh sdm prefer
The current template is “desktop default” template.
The selected template optimizes the resources in
the switch to support this level of features for
8 routed interfaces and 1024 VLANs.

number of unicast mac addresses:                  6K
number of IPv4 IGMP groups + multicast routes:    1K
number of IPv4 unicast routes:                    8K
number of directly-connected IPv4 hosts:        6K
number of indirect IPv4 routes:                 2K
number of IPv4 policy based routing aces:         0
number of IPv4/MAC qos aces:                      0.75K
number of IPv4/MAC security aces:                 1K

Looking at the output, there is no memory configured for IPv4 policy based routing aces. This means that I have to change the SDM template to routing. This is achieved be entering the global configuration command:

sdm prefer routing

The execution of the command requires a switch reboot. After the reboot I checked the SDM configuration and noticed that memory is allocated for PBR, like displayed below:

SW01-L3(config)#do sh sdm prefer
The current template is “desktop routing” template.
The selected template optimizes the resources in
the switch to support this level of features for
8 routed interfaces and 1024 VLANs.

number of unicast mac addresses:                  3K
number of IPv4 IGMP groups + multicast routes:    1K
number of IPv4 unicast routes:                    11K
number of directly-connected IPv4 hosts:        3K
number of indirect IPv4 routes:                 8K
number of IPv4 policy based routing aces:         0.5K
number of IPv4/MAC qos aces:                      0.75K
number of IPv4/MAC security aces:                 1K

So I try to apply the route-map to the specific interface, but this resulted in another syslog message.

%PLATFORM_PBR-3-UNSUPPORTED_RMAP: Route-map RM-PBR not supported for Policy-Based Routing

Seems that the PBR configuration is not supported on the switch. At least some commands are not supported. Checking the internet again, I found a document with Unsupported Route Map Commands for a Catalyst 3550.

I had to change the next-hop configuration. I replaced the route-map with the following commands.

route-map RM-PBR permit 10
match ip address ACL-PBR
set ip next-hop 10.10.10.253

Finally, after changing the route-map it could be applied to the interface. After replacing the components I tested the route-map and it is working without any problems.