Re: [FW-1] Problem with VPN

2007-04-04 Thread pkc_mls
Julio Bretín Díaz a écrit : Thanks to all of you, but I haven't found how to solve this yet. The problem is that all VPN connections worked before the Nokia appliance was restarted. Now all VPN connections have the same error that I described in my last mail. what can I do or what can I check?

Re: [FW-1] Problem with VPN

2007-04-04 Thread Sathya Prakash
Hi, In Interoperable device properties go to VPN advanced and un check the "Support key exchange for subnets" option. Thanks, SPJ -Original Message- From: Mailing list for discussion of Firewall-1 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Julio Bretín Díaz Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2007 4:

Re: [FW-1] Problem with VPN

2007-04-04 Thread Julio Bretín Díaz
Thanks to all of you, but I haven't found how to solve this yet. The problem is that all VPN connections worked before the Nokia appliance was restarted. Now all VPN connections have the same error that I described in my last mail. what can I do or what can I check? I have reset all IPSEC and S

[FW-1] Provider-1 Cpstat_Monitor

2007-04-04 Thread Pedro Boavida
Hi, I'm having a problem in Provider-1 NGX R61 environment. Checking SK, it looks like cpstat_monitor is not activated by default on the CMAs (in order to get a better performance on the MDS). Also the SK32155 explains how to activate cpstat_monitor in CMA startup using cpprod_util, but the f

Re: [FW-1] Floodgate - Nokia or SPLAT

2007-04-04 Thread Stuart Brameld
There's a load of QoS functionality in IPSO 4.2 which (supposedly) offers an alternative to Floodgate, I haven't looked at it in any detail yet. The advantage being if you use the QoS in Nokia the traffic can still be accelerated (unlike Floodgate traffic) and obviously SecureXL is free within Noki

Re: [FW-1] NGX RX65 and Edge VPN troubles

2007-04-04 Thread David DeSimone
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Thomas Nilsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > That would be fine if the VPN tunnels didn't work at all. But here we > see most of the traffic passing thru, where only some gets dropped - > within the same subnet. If I remember right, in Traditional mo