Taclane Kg 175D Manual4/26/2021
GRE by itself is an encapsulating protocol not an encrypting protocol. HTH Rick.Tip: If the failing expression is known to be legally refer to something thats sometimes null or missing, either specify a default value like myOptionalVarmyDefault, or use when-present when-missing.
These only cover the last step of the expression; to cover the whole expression, use parenthesis: (myOptionalVar.foo)myDefault, (myOptionalVar.foo). Does this meant that using Router GRE tunnels prior to TACLANE VPN not a possible design option. The issue with the configuration is my assumption you are in a higher than normal security environment, this means the folks doing configuration templates for routers assume everyone wants to DOS them. ![]() Here is how it happens, the sending device negotiates MTU with the target device and assumes all is well. When the packet is encrypted or encapsulated (GRE) it becomes bigger than the max MTU of the links inside and outside the encryptor. The hosts may attempt to discover the correct path MTU but neither the inside nor the outside encryptor can send the ICMP unreachable, packet too big message when the stations have generated frames with the DF bit set and expect a response. Result they continue to send MAX size packets that after encapuslation are too big and are dropped quietly. You can address the problem by using the tunnel MTU as the responder, this means adjusting the tunnel MTU accordingly and allowing the tunnel interface the ability to do ICMP packet too big unreacables. You can also reset the DF bit incoming to the tunnel and adjust the tunnel MTU to make it chop packets samll enough to make it all the way though to the far end unimpeeded, not optimal bandwidth useage but its a tradeoff. Its not an encryption nesting problem but really an MTU problem causing blackhole routing due to an aggressive security posture. But I do not see why sending traffic TACLANE to TACLANE via VPN tunnel would prevent you from running GRE tunnel from router to router. It seems to me that the TACLANE should accept whatever traffic it gets for the remote destination and encrypt it - why would it care what kind of traffic it was If there is something that I have missed please help me understand it. HTH Rick. There are limitation within the TACLANE that prevents encryption nesting. Other encryption devices, have problems with multiple nesting of encryption. I guess my question really is pointing to a tech spec that explains how the GRE tunnel is built and what field level information is contained in the header. Or whether anyone else has every used GRE tunnels through DOD encryption devices without problems. Thanks. If you are interested in a tech spec of GRE then I would suggest that you start with RFC2784. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply.AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |