At one of our destinations we have problems with UDP packet loss and therefore the Speedfusion VPN is very slow. IPSec VPN works better but I cannot figure out how site A, B and C which are connected over MPLS can communicate with each other.
Below you see the network diagram. The company policy doesn’t allow local Internet breakout so all traffic goes via VPN to HQ (the IPSec VPN Profile the remote network is 0.0.0.0). I would expect that local network still can communicate with each other as there are static routes to each subnet but it seems that IPSec VPN overules the static routes. With SpeedFusion/PepVPN it worked fine.
Thank you for providing the detailed diagram. First of all, SpeedFusion has several advantages and we can help you fine tune your configuration for the environment if you want to consider that.
Regarding the IPsec design, is it possible you can use VLANs on the Balance LAN interface at site A to match your switch instead of using static routes for these local networks? Would that solve the issue?
I know the advantages with SpeedFusion but at this location we have huge packet loss on the path to HQ. I am struggeling with the ISP for 4 weeks now but they claim that nothing is wrong. So, the best alternative I have for the moment is to use IPSec VPN. Unfortunately I cannot use VLANs for site B and C as these go over MPLS.
Our tech support and engineering team are looking into your problem now. Please help to follow up there since they have better visibility on the problem. They will revert asap.
