Spoke to Spoke Connectivity for Remote Access VPN on FTD
Remote users who connect via Cisco Secure Client to the corporate network behind a Cisco Secure Firewall Threat Defense device are reporting no audio on calls when calling between remote users using their softphones. These same users can call internal users on the corporate network without any issues. What is the cause of this issue?
Community Votes
100% of anonymous learners picked answer B. Votes are pick records left by other test-takers — they are not the verified answer.
Community Insight
The question tests VPN client-to-client communication (hairpinning) on FTD, where the common trap is assuming a manual NAT policy is required instead of using the native FMC checkbox.
When remote VPN users cannot communicate with each other but can reach internal hosts, the issue is typically the lack of intra-interface routing. This page establishes that enabling spoke-to-spoke connectivity resolves the audio issue between remote peers.
Selecting B, believing a manual outside-to-outside NAT policy is required, which is an ASA-centric approach rather than the FMC-managed checkbox method.
Community Discussion (4 comments)
Comments & Corrections
No comments yet — spotted an error or have a note? Share it below.
Expert Analysis
Why the Answer Is Correct
Option C is correct because the "Enable Spoke to Spoke Connectivity through Hub" option in the FMC Remote Access VPN policy is the specific configuration that permits intra-interface traffic for VPN clients. Without this option selected, the FTD device drops traffic attempting to route between two remote VPN peers, resulting in no audio for softphone calls between them.Why the Other Options Are Wrong
Option A is incorrect because the hairpinning feature is fully available on FTD; it simply needs to be enabled. Option B is incorrect because while NAT exemption is necessary, on FTD this is automatically handled by the spoke-to-spoke checkbox, making a manual outside-to-outside NAT policy the wrong approach. Option D is incorrect because split tunneling dictates whether traffic bypasses the tunnel, not whether traffic hairpins between two tunneled users.Community Comment Notes
Some learners incorrectly favor a manual NAT policy as in option B, as Bubu3k referenced a general troubleshooting guide. However, as Silexis noted, "When a VPN Client calls another VPN Client, there will be a P2P communication", which requires U-turn or hairpin capabilities, handled natively in FTD by the spoke-to-spoke option, not just NAT. Ricckku also pointed out that "The hair-pinning feature is definitely required", refuting option A's claim that it is unavailable.Official Reference
Exam Strategy
For FTD VPN issues involving client-to-client communication, look for the "Enable Spoke to Spoke Connectivity through Hub" option. Do not confuse FTD's FMC-managed checkboxes with ASA's CLI manual NAT and same-security-traffic configurations.