RV042G vs RV320

Hello all,
Can someone pls explain to me the difference between these 2 models? cause i definitely cannot find it anywhere apart from 900mbps vs 800mbps in NAT.
Basically I need the best of them for Dual Gigabit WAN + DHCP to LAN, no need for VPN.
Any idea?
Thank you all!

Hi Michiel,
The difference between RV042G and RV320 are as follows:
1. IPSec VPN thrpoughput for RV042 is 75Mbps where for RV320 it is 100 Mbps.
2. PPTP VPN connectio for RV042G is 5 where for RV320 it is 10.
And please refer to the data sheet to know more detail.
RV320 Data sheet -
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/collateral/routers/ps10907/ps9923/ps11997/data_sheet_c78-726132_ps9923_Products_Data_Sheet.html
RV042G Data sheet -
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/collateral/routers/ps10907/ps9923/ps12262/data_sheet_c78-706724.html
Thank you.

Similar Messages

Please, help me to choose the right router

Hello,
For our new small business company's office we need a router, which simultaneously satisfies all of the following conditions:
- 4 (or 8) ethernet gigabit ports;
- Wireless N;
- Easy VPN connection via Windows VPN Client';
- Wake On LAN capability
Is there a model, that have all of this? Thank You!

Hi Danail,
You can have RV042G or RV320 or RV082.
RV042G and RV320 has four Gbit ports. RV082 has eight fast ethernet ports. For Easy VPN client connection you can use Cisco Quick VPN software. You can download the Quick VPN client software from Cisco.com.
Please refer to the datasheet below to know more about each of the product.
RV320 datasheet:
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/collateral/routers/ps10907/ps9923/ps11997/data_sheet_c78-726132_ps9923_Products_Data_Sheet.html
RV042G Data sheet -
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/collateral/routers/ps10907/ps9923/ps12262/data_sheet_c78-706724.html
RV082 datasheet:
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/collateral/routers/ps9923/ps9926/data_sheet_c78-501227.pdf
Thank you.

RV082 RV042 RV042G v4 firmware bug?

Models affected: RV082 v3 (primarily) - also RV042 v3 and RV042G
Symptoms:
1) web admin GUI stops responding
2) internet speed slows or stops completely
Temporary Fix:
1) power-cycle the router, everything works fine for a random period of time
Notes:
1) happens after a month or so for RV082 that is giving me trouble.
2) seems to affect a large number of units but not all units
3) this has been going on for a YEAR OR MORE without resolution
4) also, I can only program this router with IE - for firefox, I can't get past the certificate warning and to the login prompt.
5) could this be related to https login and broken code regarding SSL certificate or its integration into the web GUI?
6) yes, I have reset the unit to factory defaults and reprogrammed
     yes, I have tried different firmware revisions
     yes, I am on the current firmware
     yes, I have re-issued the SSL certificate
Maybe the team writing the firmware could get their hands on some of the reported units with these issues and see how they behave, figure out what the real problem is so we can stop beating our heads against the wall?

What Samir said...
FWIW - here's what I've settled on:
RV042 v1 with the last v1 firmware. I have a couple clients with these. I want them to die but they won't, so they are still running fine. Some develop that squealing sound in the power supply section. Had one or two fail and upgraded to RV082
RV042 v3 (not sure which firmware) I had one client with this, NEVER had an issue
RV042G - never tried one, and I don't plan on it (maybe an RV320, although I prefer rackmountable units)
RV082 v1 with last v1 firmware (v2 firmware will break it) - several of my clients have these, and I use one at home. They just run and run and run, and occasionally one might need to have the CMOS battery replaced. I just configured one of these with a Dual-WAN and it works great. I prefer the v4 firmware UI that comes on the v3 units.
RV082 v2 = JUNK!!
RV082 v3 - firmware v4.1.1.01-sp is stable and has been running one of my clients for 2 years no issues. firmware v4.2.3.03 came loaded on a new one that was purchased in 2014 and that has also been running fine. The first gets heavy internet use with skype, audio streaming, websites. The latter has 9 VoIP phones (phonebooth) behind it and using bandwidth priority rules to share a 800kb upstream.
** v4 firmwares are unified across all v3 hardware (RV042, 82, 42G) - I only trust the two versions listed directly above. If you change/update to one of these firmwares to resolve issues, reset the router to defaults, flash the firmware, maybe reset it to defaults again just to be sure, and then program it from scratch. Save your config from the stable firmware and then you can use that to reload if you do more resetting later.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
** I love that the RV082 is rackmountable, has an internal PSU, and has an 8-port switch. It's only a few bucks more so just forget the RV042 and get the faster/better option.
** The RV325 is a compelling successor to the RV082. (basically an RV082 with Gigabit ports). It has better firewall throughput and processing, also has newer features for QoS and multiple DHCP on several vLANs. I picked up one last year to replace an RV082 but I figured out a solution before swapping the routers. I haven't been brave enough nor had enough time to give it a real test yet. Hoping to do so soon. It has external PSU which is not so great but I can deal with that - at least it's rackmountable.
(I have retracted my comment about the ISA series. I configured one running on early firmware and was impressed, but evidently they had issues and Cisco stopped making them after a relatively short run, which is a bad sign).

RV320 - PPPoE and DMZ

I really wish someone would FIX the programming to allow a PPPoE WAN1 type to use a DMZ range in the same subnet. I have gripped about this for years and keep getting ignored. This is prevalent in many of the cisco routers/security appliances and it is annoying. It is in the RV042G (which seems to just be an older version of the 320) and the ISA550 which I have been able to trick it into working.
I just purchased a RV320 thinking it would be fixed and alas it is not. If I could get past the error dialog, I would probably be fine. I have a public /29 block that is routed through a PPPoE connection. The block is in the same subnet, but because the connection is PPPoE, the WAN is programmed to REQUIRE a Static IP on WAN1 to allow a DMZ in the same subnet.
Are there any Cisco Engineers listening that can get this fixed!!!! I - and many others who use this type of connection - would be eternally grateful.

I have opened several support cases and even corresponded as well as spoke to an engineer. A year has gone by and nothing.
The servers have public addresses so the one-to-one isn't doable. I am running some services that require the server to have a hard-coded public IP
It would be great if there was a SMB device that would allow a public and private segments and route between them to the internet

RV042G Router - Inter VLAN

RV042G Router - Inter VLAN:
Does this router supports 802.1Q? Or should I connect one router port per VLAN?
eg. If I have 2 VLAN configured on ONE SWITCH, Do I:
a) TRUNK the VLAN on SWITCH and connect ONE port to the ROUTER?
b) connect ONE port on ROUTER to VLAN1, and another port to VLAN2?
Thanks,
Henrique

Hello Henrique,
I don't usually deal with sales or pricing, so I'm honestly not sure which routers are low priced. However, all of the RVs except for the RV016, RV042, and RV082 support VLAN trunking, so I would just compare the other models and see what kind of a deal you can get. I usually recommend the RV180 (which is being replaced by the RV130 soon) or maybe the RV320 if you want the newest one.
With your SG200 you will probably need to disable spanning tree on the uplinks to your RV042 for the multiple links to work, but a quick check of the Spanning Tree, RTP Interface status page on the SG will let you know if those links are being taken down.
Thank you for choosing Cisco,
Christopher Ebert - Advanced Network Support Engineer
Cisco Small Business Support Center

No internet access on VLANs with RV042G and SG300

I'm trying to set up a network for a small business which will have different offices, and so I want to separate them all by VLAN so that they cann't access each other's files. The problem is that I can't access the internet from any of the VLANs, including the default.
The RV042G router is connected to the internet through the WAN1 port and has a static IP address of 10.4.1.1. I enables multiple subnets and added one for each of the VLANs (1 - admin, 10, 20, 30, 100 - guest). I also created static routes to the SG300 switch, which has an IP address of 10.4.1.2, 10.4.10.2, etc. The switch is in Layer 3 mode and is functioning as the DHCP server. I also have a wireless access point set up that broadcasts an SSID for each VLAN, however this is not the issue since no internet connection can be established wirelessly or with a wired connection.
I am fairly certain it has something to do with the data not being correctly routed through from the internet to the client, however I can't seem to find what is configured incorrectly. If anyone could offer some suggestions it would be appreciated. Please let me know if you need more info, I have attached some of the configuration screens for reference.

Hi Paul,
Thanks for the suggestion, but I changed it from Gateway to Router and this didn't fix the problem, still no internet access.
I have a cabel modem box that connects to the RV042G through WAN1, and then the RV042G connects to the SG300 through port 1 on the RV042G. On the RV042G, this port is set to VLAN1, while the port on the SG300 is set as a trunk port. The SG300 is then assigning IP addresses to the clients. It has 4 different VLANs created that go to different offices. Does this help you understand the setup any better?

Time-out problems with RV320 (after upgrade from RV042)

config:
dual wan
WAN1: 4G router (DHCP) - approx 25Mbit/ 8Mbit
WAN2: PPOE (DSL) - 1 Mbit/ 0.2 Mbit
worked with a RV042 before and upgraded to a RV320 now.
all other things are unchanged.
3 problems - 2 solved/ not critical - one still open:
a) not critical: DHCP Status does not include all devices (changing view - but all-time problem)
I would suspect a software bug.... DHCP itself works perfectly/ IPs are assigned (just not shown in status)
b) solved (at least for now): internet connection featured time-outs; after many tries, disabling the SPI in the firewall helped
btw: this only happend for the WAN1 - WAN2 worked (or is that slow that the additonal wait time did not matter ;-)
c) very annoying: exchange connection (from Outlook client to external exchange) still has time-outs (mostly the whole mail client hangs/ ends to be restarted).
As soon as I disable WAN1, it works! But it´s not the LTE WAN itself - switching back to the RV042 does not show the same symptom.
I tried: include IP into local DNS (in general I work with google DNS servers - but changing that does not help either), opening all traffic for teh realevant IPs and disabling the firewall completely. no positive results....
thanks for any hints....

I agree with you on a, probably a bug of some sort.
b is an issue I've seen before, and even on similar bandwidth (25/5) on my rv016. What was able to figure out is that the carrier (ISP) is sending about 4k/sec of ICMP packets to the router, which in turn makes the router think it's under attack so it drops the connection. As you can tell, disabling the SPI helps. For me, putting another router in front of my rv016 (on 2 of 3 wans) was my only 'permanent' solution.
c sounds like there's a protocol binding/static route in the rv042 that you need to add to the rv320. I'd check that first.
Huntsville's Premiere Car and Bike e-magazine: www.huntsvillecarscene.com

RV320 SSL VPN ActiveX and Virtual Passage driver on Windows 7 64-bit

Hi,
My company has just purchased a new RV320 router and only afterwards found out from the release notes that there are issues with the SSL VPN in this unit and other small business routers. Is there any news on when these issues will be fixed?
1) ActiveX controls have expired certificate dated 24/9/14 - this prevents them from running unless without changing IE security settings to prompt or allow unsigned controls, which is a big security risk.
2) ActiveX controls do not work on Windows 64-bit. Release notes state Windows 7 IE10 and Windows 8.1 IE11, however they also fail on Windows 7 IE11. Even adding router to Trusted Sites to force 32-bit mode results in error message stating that IE is required for the controls.
3) Virtual Passage driver will not install - crashes IE10/IE11 with a BEX violation. From a dig around the web it appears that the Netgear SRX5308 uses the same Cavium chipset and a Virtual Passage driver that works with Windows 7 64-bit, and installs fine using IE10/11 (and if you install the Netgear driver it works with the Cisco RV routers too, proving that the driver is fully compatible...) - if Netgear can get this working, why can't Cisco?
I've only just started setting us this router and show stopper issues like this might end up with an RMA being requested as it appears to be unsuitable for purpose, already run into other issues with I've posted about. :(
EDIT: Got (2) sort of working on IE11 - seems that the Cisco interface is specifically looking for old style IE user agent strings, so using developer tools to set the user agent to IE9, and changing security settings in Trusted Sites to prompt for unsigned controls (due to issue (1)), allows the controls to install and load. These issues are pretty simple to fix, requiring just a string check change and updated signed controls. Fingers crossed these are fixed in the new firmware due soon, awaiting response from Cisco support to my open ticket.
Looks like (3) is prevented from working by (1), and also because the certificate has expired it is treated as software without a valid publisher which cannot be installed in Windows 7 without fiddling in the registry. Releasing an updated version with a certificate that isn't expired should solve that issue too.
These are ridiculously simple fixes to push out, I can't believe a major hardware vendor like Cisco hasn't already solved these issues.

I've had a reply from Cisco support regarding this issue, and it's a bleak outlook. This is a copy from the email I received:
"Engineering has no plans to support SSL VPN on RV32x due to chipset limitations. Pretty much, it will work for old XP and Win7 32-bits."
So Cisco are falsely advertising that the RV320 has SSL VPN capabilities when there are no plans to update it so that it works with 64-bit Windows (which is now the major install base for Windows as most new systems are 64-bit based), and as the certificates have expired in the SSL VPN components they are not even useable on 32-bit systems without overriding a number of security settings.
Dan

RV042G Log Email and other issues

The RV042G manual said to use this site for support so here goes. After owning and operating the RV082 for many years, I recently upgraded to the RV042G V01. Overall the RV042G hardware appears to function pretty good. The RV042G has faster throughput, but it is slightly slower in command/control response and boot than the RV082. I have now owned the RV042G about two days and have found a number of issues. Specifically, emailing logs doesn't work.
- Emailing logs does not work. RV042G does not appear to handle any type of connection authentication, it does not have a place for the senders user name or password. I have tried SMTP servers that require no authentication and ones that do, none of them work. RV082 worked fine with the Time Warner Cable (TWC) SMTP server, RV042G does not. Additionally, there is NO output in the logs to show a failure. So TWO bugs here. I have checked settings to ensure no blocking rules, have rebooted, and even did a factory default with no luck and absolutely no mention in the logs anywhere of failure to send.
Email is my primary issue, any suggestions on getting this working would be appreciated. I've also identified a number of other issues as well and included them here to avoid multiple posts. These are:
- Port 0 apparently responds to interrogation and shows CLOSED (not STEALTH per grc.com). This was NOT the case for the RV082 and is a potential security vulnerability as it cannot be redirected.
- Port 1 is CLOSED and apparently responds to interrogation. This was NOT the case for the RV082. Normally I would be good on the RV082. I could redirect any OPEN or CLOSED ports to the bit bucket (192.168.1.254 for instance). BUT, the RV042G Port Forwarding is NOT sending things to the bit bucket and instead decides to OVERRIDE the forwarding and respond to queries. So there are TWO bugs here. This is a potential security vulnerability.
- The ALL Logs tab shows nothing, but sub tabs do until AFTER you hit the clear button, then it works as expected. This happens every time you open the logs. Another poster identified this problem so this is confirmation of that issue. Also, once the dialog box for the log has closed, it will not open again until leaving the page and returning.
- Authentication failures will show up in the System Log but not in the Access Log?
- HTTPS html interface works fine in Firefox. However, turn it off and use just HTTP and there is a problem. Can't see the forms and buttons, can only see the background image. This isn't as much of a problem as I can just use HTTPS, however, with the RV082 when HTTPS was activated it would open the remote management portal regardless of whether the button was clicked or not. So really a non-issue but a bug none the less.
- RV082 could send 500 log events, RV042 can only send 100. Again, not a bug but a reduction in capability over the older RV082.
One last thing, your hardware version control numbers and firmware download page are confusing for the RV042G V01. Found this when I checked if there was a newer version of the firmware than what the RV042G shipped with. Here is what the firmware update page shows:
"Cisco RV042G Dual Gigabit WAN VPN Router"
"Firmware Release 4.2.1.02 - RV042, RV082, RV016 firmware 4.2.1.02-tm (V3 hardware required)".
The problem is that you reset the hardware version in the RV042G (V01). Just seems probable that someone will download the firmware for the RV042 V01 and try to put it on the RV042G V01.
I like the RV042G overall and will wait for updates for these issues (email logs would be nice sooner rather than later as this is an advertised feature). The RV082 was a great router for a long time ONCE most of the bugs were fixed, hoping the RV042G will be the same.

Guess I spoke too soon. If Remote Management = Disable and HTTPS = Enable, it will OPEN external access to port 443. So have to use an access rule to kill it off. Can STEALTH Port 1 as well with an access rule but have to block all traffic there. Cannot block Port 0 (make it STEALTH) with an access rule and this needs to be fixed in firmware.
So port forwarding does work but not when sent to the bit bucket, have to use an Access Rule instead. (You can see this by doing the following: turn off HTTPS and remote management and look at port 443 from the outside of the firewall. No response at all. Now enable HTTPS and keep Remote Management disabled and forward port 443 to an unused internal IP address. The port still shows up as OPEN but won't connect. Again, the RV082 did not exhibit this behavoir and would simply not provide any response to an external query if forwarded to an unused internal IP address.)
For clarity, I have the RV042G V01 with Firmware Version : v4.2.1.02 (Jan 18 2012 14:10:55).

RV320 SSL VPN web service unable to connect port 56000 56001...

I have recently installed a RV320 dual WAN small business router in order to use the SSL VPN functionality to allow secure access to our intranet pages which are hosted on a server inside our network. I have the latest firmware installed on the router.
With the firewall feature of the RV320 disabled - After logging in to the router remotely via the HTTPS interface, I am able to use the web-based services such as SSH and NetworkPls. However, when using the HTTP and HTTPS services I receive a web browser unable to connect error on port 56000, 1, 2, 3 ... This is regardless of whether I enter a URL or IP address on the network behind the router or on the internet.
Enabling the firewall feature of the RV320 gives a different result - when any IP or URL is entered into the box in the second image below, the router log-in page is loaded instead of the required site. I have pasted an extract from the log at the bottom of this post although it doesn't seem to contain any relevant information. As a separate issue, you will also notice that users connecting to the router brings up [HACK] SynFlooding Attack in error.
Can anyone explain why this is happening? Alternatively, does anyone have a guide for setting up a IPSec VPN with this router? There seems to be very little literature available for this model.
Thanks in advance for your help.
Log extract
2013-11-02, 11:36:19
Connection Accepted
IN=eth1 OUT=eth0 SRC=178.239.83.183 DST=192.168.10.100 DMAC=e0:2f:6d:75:35:7d SMAC=d4:ca:6d:98:3e:55 LEN=60 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=54 ID=57573 DF PROTO=TCP SPT=54925 DPT=993 WINDOW=5840 RES=0x00 SYN URGP=0
2013-11-02, 11:36:19
[HACK] SynFlooding Attack
IN=eth1 OUT=eth0 SRC=178.239.83.183 DST=192.168.10.100 DMAC=e0:2f:6d:75:35:7d SMAC=d4:ca:6d:98:3e:55 LEN=60 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=54 ID=57573 DF PROTO=TCP SPT=54925 DPT=993 WINDOW=5840 RES=0x00 SYN URGP=0
2013-11-02, 11:31:53
Connection Accepted
IN=eth1 OUT=eth0 SRC=178.239.83.156 DST=192.168.10.100 DMAC=e0:2f:6d:75:35:7d SMAC=d4:ca:6d:98:3e:55 LEN=60 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=53 ID=50721 DF PROTO=TCP SPT=55634 DPT=993 WINDOW=5840 RES=0x00 SYN URGP=0
2013-11-02, 11:31:53
[HACK] SynFlooding Attack
IN=eth1 OUT=eth0 SRC=178.239.83.156 DST=192.168.10.100 DMAC=e0:2f:6d:75:35:7d SMAC=d4:ca:6d:98:3e:55 LEN=60 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=53 ID=50721 DF PROTO=TCP SPT=55634 DPT=993 WINDOW=5840 RES=0x00 SYN URGP=0
2013-11-02, 11:31:38
User Log
User cisco login success from 221.142.25.181
2013-11-02, 11:31:38
User Log
User cisco login success from 221.142.25.181
2013-11-02, 11:29:49
Kernel
kernel: upnp idx=83, ip=192.168.10.220, eport=59725, iport=59725
2013-11-02, 11:29:49
Kernel
kernel: wrong ip[0],not_list[0]
2013-11-02, 11:29:43
Connection Accepted
IN=eth1 OUT=eth0 SRC=176.251.102.32 DST=192.168.10.100 DMAC=e0:2f:6d:75:35:7d SMAC=d4:ca:6d:98:3e:55 LEN=64 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=52 ID=44670 DF PROTO=TCP SPT=49423 DPT=143 WINDOW=65535 RES=0x00 SYN URGP=0
2013-11-02, 11:29:43
[HACK] SynFlooding Attack
IN=eth1 OUT=eth0 SRC=176.251.102.32 DST=192.168.10.100 DMAC=e0:2f:6d:75:35:7d SMAC=d4:ca:6d:98:3e:55 LEN=64 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=52 ID=44670 DF PROTO=TCP SPT=49423 DPT=143 WINDOW=65535 RES=0x00 SYN URGP=0
2013-11-02, 11:29:12
Kernel
kernel: upnp idx=83, ip=192.168.10.220, eport=59725, iport=59725
2013-11-02, 11:29:12
Kernel
kernel: wrong ip[0],not_list[0]
2013-11-02, 11:29:12
SSL Log
User ben login success from 221.142.25.181

After lots of trial and error, I was able to eliminate this problem. What I wound up doing is defining the XE service again in the listener.ora file:
SID_LIST_LISTENER =
(SID_LIST =
    (SID_DESC =
      (SID_NAME = XE)
      (ORACLE_HOME = C:\ProgramData\oraclexe\app\oracle\product\11.2.0\server)
I know that typically you should not have to do this, especially since I already had defined DEFAULT_SERIVCE_LISTENER = (XE) at the bottom of the listener.ora file. Explicitly defining the XE service in the listener.ora file allows the listener to find it while the system is running under the Cisco AnyConnect VPN. The only hiccup I found by doing this is that the XE service is discovered twice by the listener when the system is NOT running under the Cisco AnyConnect VPN. It still works OK. The listener just seems to ignore the repeated definition of the XE service (see output below):
C:\ProgramData\oraclexe\app\oracle\product\11.2.0\server\bin>lsnrctl service
LSNRCTL for 32-bit Windows: Version 11.2.0.2.0 - Production on 13-JUN-2013 10:03:15
.......(omitted output).......
Service "XE" has 2 instance(s).
Instance "XE", status UNKNOWN, has 1 handler(s) for this service...
    Handler(s):
      "DEDICATED" established:0 refused:0
         LOCAL SERVER
Instance "xe", status READY, has 1 handler(s) for this service...
    Handler(s):
      "DEDICATED" established:0 refused:0 state:ready
         LOCAL SERVER
Service "XEXDB" has 1 instance(s).
Instance "xe", status READY, has 1 handler(s) for this service...
    Handler(s):
      "D000" established:0 refused:0 current:0 max:1022 state:ready
         DISPATCHER <machine: DEV-M-137GF, pid: 5544>
(ADDRESS=(PROTOCOL=tcp)(HOST=DEV-M-137GF.paychex.com)(PORT=58257))
The command completed successfully
If anyone has a cleaner solution for this problem, please let me know. Otherwise, I am moving forward with what I did.
Thanks.....Paul

Load Balancing on RV320

Hi,
My Cisco RV320 router are not working like I want ...
I get two ISP in France, same tech. specs., sames bandwidth, but 2 differents way to connect.
The first WAN is connected in PPPoE with a ADSL2+ Modem
The second WAN is connected in Static IP with a modem/router
I set the load balancing Auto. but it seem that the WAN2 is more used than the WAN1...
For example, I upload a big documents, like a video on youtube, witch take a long time and need the max Bandwidth. While I'm going to download a file with an internal software, who use a different port by the way. The most of the time, it only use the WAN2 ... so my download is flanged ! It only donwload @~450KB/S when it can max @ ~1,8MO/S, and the WAN1 is not blinking ... And sometimes the balancing is good ... I can't understand the RV320 logic ? But Maybe is there a bug ? Maybe I get a bad configuration ?
Have a clue ?
Please help me !

So, you can hear the phone ringing and answer it? which means that SIP pakets are coming through WAN to LAN and well redirected to the phone IP, but you cannot hear after that, which means that there could be a problem with the RTP packets.
If you have problem only with the incoming calls and not the outgoing, than try enable/disable SIP ALG (Firewall). If that doesn't fix the issue, try to allow (or even forward) from WAN to LAN RDP - UDP ports 16384-32767 to the phone IP.
Regards,
Kremena

PPTP Problems with RV320

I just bought a new RV320 to replace my older RV082 in my local office network. I was able to get the RV320 set up and running, but had a problem with the PPTP settings. On the RV082 I have three gateway-to-gateway VPNs set up and when a user logs in using a PPTP VPN they are able to access resources on any of the gateway-togateway VPNs. I set up the RV320 the same way and had all of the gateway-to-gateway tunnels up and running and verified from my internal network that I can reach the servers on each tunnel. I set up a PPTP user and verified that I can reach the network from a remote computer, but when I try to reach a resource on one of the gateway-to-gateway tunnels it crashes the RV320 and I have to reconnect all of my gateway-to-gateway VPNs. I ensured that all of the pass throughs are enabled and haven't found any other settings that seem out of place. Can anyone think of anything else that I may need to set up to get this to work?
I know a lot of people wouldn't use the PPTP with the other options available, but this is the best option to connect my Surface RT tablet to the network while I'm on the road since a client isn't availble for it.
Thanks,
Clinton

Clinton,
just found your post and it sounds similar to an issue I am experiencing with a client.
Two sites, RV320 with latest firmware in the main office and a satellite office with a Netgear unit. Both connected via a gateway to gateway IPSec vpn. The link is very stable. The satellite office initiates the connection. The main office RV320 also has a number of users setup for PPTP remote access to company resources such as rdp/rdc.
Our issue is when I vpn in with pptp to the main office, the RV320, the moment I try to access the satellite office subnet it triggers the IPSec gateway to gateway vpn to crash. I then have to remote into the satellite office and manual restart the link.... then all is fine again. Now, if I am physically at the main office, and ping or access the satellite office subnet, all is fine.
My thought has been that either I do not have the gateway to gateway vpn setup properly or there is some access rule I am missing. I need to do some more research and experiment with the connection. It very well could be my setup as this was the first time I have setup IPSec... Just as a note, the RV320 itself never crashes ... it just shows the IPSec vpn is down ... I need to isolate the issue to either the Netgear or Cisco side...
I will follow this thread and see if you find out anything.
cheers
greg

RV320 problem with VPN connect (BUG)

forgive for bad English
Today I bought and I adjusted RV320, at once I saw some problems.
Firmware last
1. I adjusted two VPN tunnels between RV320 and two RV-082
also I saw what not one tunnel in Web panel not connect.
I many times pressed, the condition didn't change!
Having made Ping on 192.168.1.1 computers in a network 192.168.1.0 I saw answers:
it is simple a miracle or huge BUG.
2 The second BUG, VPN tunel No. 2 doesn't work in general as don't kick. And before there was RV-042G and RV-82 and everything was OK
From log:
2013-08-29, 21:47:28
VPN Log
[g2gips1]: cmd=down-client peer=78.31.177.145 peer_client=192.168.2.0/24 peer_client_net=192.168.2.0 peer_client_mask=255.255.255.0
2013-08-29, 21:47:28
VPN Log
ip route del 192.168.2.0/24 via 178.216.123.65 dev eth1 metric 35
2013-08-29, 21:47:28
VPN Log
iptables -t nat -D vpn -s 192.168.0.0/24 -d 192.168.2.0/24 -j ACCEPT
2013-08-29, 21:47:28
VPN Log
iptables -t nat -D vpn -s 192.168.2.0/24 -d 192.168.0.0/24 -j ACCEPT
2013-08-29, 21:47:28
VPN Log
iptables -t nat -D vpn_postrouting -s 192.168.0.0/24 -d 192.168.2.0/24 -j ACCEPT
2013-08-29, 21:47:28
VPN Log
iptables -t nat -D vpn_postrouting -o eth0 -s 192.168.2.0/24 -d 192.168.0.0/24 -j ACCEPT
2013-08-29, 21:47:37
VPN Log
[g2gips1] #14: [Tunnel Established] sent MR3, ISAKMP SA established
2013-08-29, 21:47:38
VPN Log
[g2gips1]: cmd=up-client peer=78.31.177.145 peer_client=192.168.2.0/24 peer_client_net=192.168.2.0 peer_client_mask=255.255.255.0
2013-08-29, 21:47:38
VPN Log
ip route add 192.168.2.0/24 via 178.216.123.65 dev eth1 metric 35
2013-08-29, 21:47:38
VPN Log
iptables -t nat -I vpn -s 192.168.0.0/24 -d 192.168.2.0/24 -j ACCEPT
2013-08-29, 21:47:38
VPN Log
iptables -t nat -I vpn -s 192.168.2.0/24 -d 192.168.0.0/24 -j ACCEPT
2013-08-29, 21:47:38
VPN Log
iptables -t nat -I vpn_postrouting -s 192.168.0.0/24 -d 192.168.2.0/24 -j ACCEPT
2013-08-29, 21:47:38
VPN Log
iptables -t nat -I vpn_postrouting -o eth0 -s 192.168.2.0/24 -d 192.168.0.0/24 -j ACCEPT
2013-08-29, 21:47:38
VPN Log
[g2gips1] #15: [Tunnel Established] IPsec SA established {ESP=>0x102b2557 < 0xc23b7d0f}
What problem i'm undersdund.
3 The third BUG, adding or changing VPN tunnels, against for a second there is a form for addition of the new tunnel, why it? ? ?

A little later...
I solved reset all settings to default and to adjust from scratch, all work.
What is done? I don't understand.

Is it possible the RV320 block some external ip address only to some IP on my LAN ?

Hello,
i have been blocked in firewall rules some external IP address but it will applied for all computers on LAN.
I would to know if is possible do it for only group of ip or vlan?
Thank you,
Raphael Guarita

Raphael.
When you select the Source and Destination address you should be able to select Range. There is no option to select a VLAN.
http://www.cisco.com/c/dam/en/us/td/docs/routers/csbr/rv320/administration/guide/en/rv32x_ag_en.pdf
- Marty

One of the RV042g routers freezes

I bought two RV042G routers manufactured 07-2012. One works fine, the second loses VPN connection and access to the web interface in a few minutes after power up (internal network continues to operate normally and have access to the Internet). Both have PID RV042G V01 and Firmware version v4.2.1.02. If I understand correctly, this PID shows that routers have hardware version 1 but version of the firmware is only for hardware version 3. Could it be the problem with this incompatibility (while another similar router works without problems)? Whether it can be resolved by replacing to the correct firmware version? Where I can get it?

As I understand, there is a huge misunderstanding between models.
Viacheslav said that he has RV042G and Jonathan is speaking about RV042.
Technically hardware may be the same, except that one (RV042) runs at 100mbps, and another (RV042G) at 1gbps.
There are no technical documentation about RV042G stating which versions are available.
I have purchased one router RV042G V01 (gigabit one) a week ago, manufactured 04/2013. But it was loosing connection to the web UI after few minutes it was being left off connected. Consulted with the Cisco Small business representative and was advised that firmware available for RV042G on this link is valid for all the RV042G routers as there is no V3 version of hardware for it.
http://software.cisco.com/download/release.html?mdfid=284170426&flowid=32902&softwareid=282465789&release=4.2.2.08&relind=AVAILABLE&rellifecycle=&reltype=latest
The firmware is not good for it, as there are some files missing when logging into web UI. and it still looses connection and not responding to web address http://192.168.1.1/ on whatever port it was running.
I have had few workarounds, by changing IP of my own computer, it sometimes gives response to access web UI. But again if you leave web UI for few mintues, it just does not respond. Seems like it would stop httpd service on router.
I would like to get more information about the versioning.
In conclusion, if Jonathan is right, then that router RV042G V01 (running fw: 4.2.1.02-tm) = V4 hardware?

RV042G vs RV320

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for