Model: RUT950
Firmware: RUT9XX_R_00.06.08.3
We use the RUT950 routers to establish L2TP VPN to our LNS. In the L2TP config, I enable the Default Route option and I can see that a route is added to the routing table. I have used this setup on approximately 200 RUT950 routers and it works flawlessly, however it is not working on a newly ordered batch of routers. The new routers establish the L2TP VPN, however they are unreachable from our LNS, and I see that they add multiple default routes to their routing table which makes me think that there may be asymmetric routing. For comparison, please see the following:
Working router firmware: RUT9XX_R_00.06.07.7
Working router routing table:
root@Teltonika-RUT950:~# ip route
default via lns.touchnet.co.za dev l2tp-TNT proto static
10.0.2.240/28 dev br-lan proto kernel scope link src 10.0.2.241
100.116.112.40/30 dev wwan0 proto kernel scope link src 100.116.112.42
lns.touchnet.co.za via 100.116.112.41 dev wwan0 proto static
lns.touchnet.co.za dev l2tp-TNT proto kernel scope link src 172.16.13.198
Not working router firmware: RUT9XX_R_00.06.08.3
Not working router routing table:
root@Teltonika-RUT950:~# ip route
default via lns.touchnet.co.za dev l2tp-TNT proto static
default dev wwan0 proto static scope link src 172.28.18.225 metric 10
10.0.43.144/28 dev br-lan proto kernel scope link src 10.0.43.145
lns.touchnet.co.za dev l2tp-TNT proto kernel scope link src 172.16.23.246
lns.touchnet.co.za dev wwan0 proto static scope link metric 10
172.28.18.225 dev wwan0 proto static scope link metric 10
The configuration settings between the working router and the not working router are identical. Please let me know if you need more info and I'll be happy to oblige.
Regards
Peter
