On 6/24/06, Josh Simoneau <jsimoneau at lmtcs dot com> wrote:
> What I need is for users on the remote m0n0walls (In this case
> 192.168.10.x clients) to access subnets on the Cisco 3500 that are not
> local to the central m0n0wall.
This is a situation where having summarizable routes per site makes
life a lot easier. i.e. if you need multiple /24's at a site, use a
/16 and split it up, or something similar.
But since renumbering is probably out of the question, what you need
is parallel tunnels, one for each subnet.