Are you referring to my configuration between MT and MT or MT and Cisco?
You wrote that you have reproduced the problem between MT and MT. Yes, I agree in that case the tunnel does not break, but the peer disappears
from the "Remote Peers" tab. I thought this was significant, since the same thing happens in the MT to Cisco case, but in that case, the tunnel
I assume you are referring to my MT to Cisco configuration.
On the MT side, the configuration is the same as I posted in the MT to MT configuration.
Do you have separate policy for the peer, or both peers share the same policy?
I'm unsure what you mean by "the peer". Do you mean the peer at the other end of the tunnel, or do you mean the second peer at my local end?
I will assume you mean the second peer at my local end. This is the peer, which, if enabled, causes the first tunnel to fail. Please confirm this is what you meant.
I have two configurations I have tried:
1) At the local end, the second peer has its own policy, which does not share a subnet with the first tunnel.
2) At the local end, I have not configured any policy for the second peer. I use a dummy address for the second peer.
In both configurations above, if I enable the second peer, the first tunnel stops carrying traffic and a message appears in the log
saying "unknown information exchange received." Also, the peer from the first tunnel disappears form the "Remote Peers" list. The
SA's remain in the "Installed SAs" list, but no traffic moves.
If I click Flush, the tunnel resumes carrying traffic.
I do not have access to the configuration at the remote (Cisco) end, so my experiments can only be performed at my end.
If there are any other configurations you would like me to try, please let me know.
These experiments were performed with ROS 4.6. I will be updating to 4.9, but I don't expect there is any difference.