ML
    • Recent
    • Categories
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Groups
    • Register
    • Login

    Thoughts on a Ubiquiti/Cisco comparo?

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved IT Discussion
    ciscovpnerlubiquiti
    14 Posts 7 Posters 2.7k Views
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • art_of_shredA
      art_of_shred
      last edited by

      This is the basic VPN config, if that makes a difference:

      ADDR
      Call server 192.168.*****
      VPN
      General
      VPN Enabled
      VPN Vendor Other
      Gateway Address… *****
      Encapsulation 4500 – 4500
      Copy TOS No
      Auth. Type
      Auth. Type PSK
      IKE PSK
      IKE ID (Group Name)… *****
      Pre Shared Key (PSK) *****
      IKE Phase 1
      IKE ID Type FQDN
      IKE Xchg Mode Aggressive
      IKE DH Group 2
      IKE Encryption Alg 3DES
      IKE Auth. Alg. SHA-1
      IKE Config. Mode Disabled
      IKE Phase 2
      IPsec PFS DH Group 2
      IPsec Encryption Alg 3DES
      IPsec Auth. Alg. SHA-1
      Protected Network… 192.168.*****
      IKE Over TCP
      IKE Over TCP Never

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • coliverC
        coliver
        last edited by

        Looks like IPSEC... you should be good to replace the router with an Ubiquti.

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
        • scottalanmillerS
          scottalanmiller
          last edited by

          Definitely IPSEC, should be fun getting them to talk to each other.

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • stacksofplatesS
            stacksofplates @coliver
            last edited by

            @coliver said in Thoughts on a Ubiquiti/Cisco comparo?:

            I think the answer is yes to all of these questions. Cisco does use a proprietary VPN for the client connections but, if I remember correctly, their site-to-site stuff is using IPSEC or L2TP.

            Ya I've done site-to-site with IPsec between an ERL and a Cisco.

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 4
            • JaredBuschJ
              JaredBusch
              last edited by

              That is just standard IPSEC form the looks. I would not expect a problem assuming all sides are on a static WAN IP.

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 2
              • DashrenderD
                Dashrender
                last edited by

                Why do you have a SonicWall handling the things for the VOIP? Was this split out on purpose?

                JaredBuschJ 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • JaredBuschJ
                  JaredBusch @Dashrender
                  last edited by

                  @Dashrender said in Thoughts on a Ubiquiti/Cisco comparo?:

                  Why do you have a SonicWall handling the things for the VOIP? Was this split out on purpose?

                  He doesn't. This is obviously an in place system from before they were a client.

                  scottalanmillerS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • scottalanmillerS
                    scottalanmiller @JaredBusch
                    last edited by

                    @JaredBusch said in Thoughts on a Ubiquiti/Cisco comparo?:

                    @Dashrender said in Thoughts on a Ubiquiti/Cisco comparo?:

                    Why do you have a SonicWall handling the things for the VOIP? Was this split out on purpose?

                    He doesn't. This is obviously an in place system from before they were a client.

                    You can always be sure that any SonicWall is from pre-NTG 🙂 Cisco you might see with us, Meraki possibly, but those are definitely on the uncommon side. But SonicWall, I don't think you'll ever see that. 🙂

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                    • DashrenderD
                      Dashrender
                      last edited by

                      While you both might have read an assumed NTG installed the SonicWall, let me just tell you both, that wasn't what I said, or trying to say.

                      I was asking - why was the SonicWall installed at all? Why did that traffic need to be split out in such a way that it couldn't be handled by the Cisco?

                      Perhaps the answer is - that was before our time, so we have no clue.

                      I was just asking.

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • art_of_shredA
                        art_of_shred
                        last edited by

                        This is just a project. What's the line? "Not my circus, not my monkeys"?

                        RojoLocoR 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                        • RojoLocoR
                          RojoLoco @art_of_shred
                          last edited by

                          @art_of_shred said in Thoughts on a Ubiquiti/Cisco comparo?:

                          This is just a project. What's the line? "Not my circus, not my monkeys"?

                          I think it goes "not my circus, not my Sonicwall".

                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 4
                          • 1 / 1
                          • First post
                            Last post