Manually Setting Interface metric priority of Network Adapters not preferring lower metric route on Windows
After Connecting to Cisco VPN AnyConnect, Now I have two network interfaces having set same default routes, but with different metric values. Even after manually changing/raising the metric value of one default route(i.e. imposed by VPN from metric value 2 to 1000) to give preference to my default route(metric value 26), it's still preferring the VPN one(instead of raising the VPN route metric value from 2 to 1000 as you can see in route print output)
Here is my route print output:
route print
===========================================================================
Interface List
10...90 4c e5 58 9f 09 ......Atheros AR9285 802.11b/g/n WiFi Adapter
20...00 05 9a 3c 7a 00 ......Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client Virtual M
niport Adapter for Windows
===========================================================================
IPv4 Route Table
===========================================================================
Active Routes:
Network Destination Netmask Gateway Interface Metric
0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 192.168.1.1 192.168.1.2 26
0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 10.0.0.1 10.1.105.2 1000
10.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 On-link 10.1.105.2 1255
10.1.105.2 255.255.255.255 On-link 10.1.105.2 1255
10.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 10.1.105.2 1255
127.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 On-link 127.0.0.1 306
127.0.0.1 255.255.255.255 On-link 127.0.0.1 306
127.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 127.0.0.1 306
164.100.28.5 255.255.255.255 192.168.1.1 192.168.1.2 26
164.100.176.115 255.255.255.255 192.168.1.1 192.168.1.2 26
192.168.1.0 255.255.255.0 On-link 192.168.1.2 281
192.168.1.1 255.255.255.255 On-link 192.168.1.2 26
192.168.1.2 255.255.255.255 On-link 192.168.1.2 281
192.168.1.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 192.168.1.2 281
224.0.0.0 240.0.0.0 On-link 127.0.0.1 306
224.0.0.0 240.0.0.0 On-link 192.168.1.2 281
224.0.0.0 240.0.0.0 On-link 10.1.105.2 1255
255.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 127.0.0.1 306
255.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 192.168.1.2 281
255.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 10.1.105.2 1255
===========================================================================
Persistent Routes:
Network Address Netmask Gateway Address Metric
0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 10.0.0.1 999
===========================================================================
IPv6 Route Table
===========================================================================
Active Routes:
If Metric Network Destination Gateway
23 58 ::/0 On-link
1 306 ::1/128 On-link
23 306 2001:0:9d38:6abd:348b:29cb:f5fe:96fd/128
On-link
23 306 fe80::348b:29cb:f5fe:96fd/128
On-link
1 306 ff00::/8 On-link
23 306 ff00::/8 On-link
===========================================================================
Persistent Routes:
None
I doubted of this Persistent route entry block which is there in output above as:
Persistent Routes:
Network Address Netmask Gateway Address Metric
0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 10.0.0.1 999
But after issuing the below delete route command as:
route delete 0.0.0.0 mask 0.0.0.0 192.168.1.1
Now Persistent route entry has gone, its displaying as None.
As you see, Even Metric is 26 which is much lower than 1000, it's still following 1000 metric route. What is going on?
Network Destination Netmask Gateway Interface Metric
0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 192.168.1.1 192.168.1.2 26
0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 10.0.0.1 10.1.105.2 1000
Even I have done the following:
In my Adapter Settings (Control PanelNetwork and InternetNetwork Connections) Advanced Settings Changed the order of the connections so that my connection priority is top on the list over Cisco AnyConnect VPN.
Still If i tracert google.com, still my traffic going over VPN.
Where is the concept of preferring lower cost matrix?
can someone explain to me, what is going over here?
If someone wants to say Cisco AnyConnect Client is playing here behind the scene,
Shall I no more believe on my route print output's?
Shall I no more believe on concept of preferring lower metric value over higher ones?
please, I want to have my doubts clear.
networking vpn routing cisco-vpn-client split-tunnel
asked Sep 22 '13 at 9:30
Ashish Kataria
19114
add a comment |
After Connecting to Cisco VPN AnyConnect, Now I have two network interfaces having set same default routes, but with different metric values. Even after manually changing/raising the metric value of one default route(i.e. imposed by VPN from metric value 2 to 1000) to give preference to my default route(metric value 26), it's still preferring the VPN one(instead of raising the VPN route metric value from 2 to 1000 as you can see in route print output)
Here is my route print output:
route print
===========================================================================
Interface List
10...90 4c e5 58 9f 09 ......Atheros AR9285 802.11b/g/n WiFi Adapter
20...00 05 9a 3c 7a 00 ......Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client Virtual M
niport Adapter for Windows
===========================================================================
IPv4 Route Table
===========================================================================
Active Routes:
Network Destination Netmask Gateway Interface Metric
0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 192.168.1.1 192.168.1.2 26
0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 10.0.0.1 10.1.105.2 1000
10.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 On-link 10.1.105.2 1255
10.1.105.2 255.255.255.255 On-link 10.1.105.2 1255
10.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 10.1.105.2 1255
127.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 On-link 127.0.0.1 306
127.0.0.1 255.255.255.255 On-link 127.0.0.1 306
127.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 127.0.0.1 306
164.100.28.5 255.255.255.255 192.168.1.1 192.168.1.2 26
164.100.176.115 255.255.255.255 192.168.1.1 192.168.1.2 26
192.168.1.0 255.255.255.0 On-link 192.168.1.2 281
192.168.1.1 255.255.255.255 On-link 192.168.1.2 26
192.168.1.2 255.255.255.255 On-link 192.168.1.2 281
192.168.1.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 192.168.1.2 281
224.0.0.0 240.0.0.0 On-link 127.0.0.1 306
224.0.0.0 240.0.0.0 On-link 192.168.1.2 281
224.0.0.0 240.0.0.0 On-link 10.1.105.2 1255
255.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 127.0.0.1 306
255.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 192.168.1.2 281
255.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 10.1.105.2 1255
===========================================================================
Persistent Routes:
Network Address Netmask Gateway Address Metric
0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 10.0.0.1 999
===========================================================================
IPv6 Route Table
===========================================================================
Active Routes:
If Metric Network Destination Gateway
23 58 ::/0 On-link
1 306 ::1/128 On-link
23 306 2001:0:9d38:6abd:348b:29cb:f5fe:96fd/128
On-link
23 306 fe80::348b:29cb:f5fe:96fd/128
On-link
1 306 ff00::/8 On-link
23 306 ff00::/8 On-link
===========================================================================
Persistent Routes:
None
I doubted of this Persistent route entry block which is there in output above as:
Persistent Routes:
Network Address Netmask Gateway Address Metric
0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 10.0.0.1 999
But after issuing the below delete route command as:
route delete 0.0.0.0 mask 0.0.0.0 192.168.1.1
Now Persistent route entry has gone, its displaying as None.
As you see, Even Metric is 26 which is much lower than 1000, it's still following 1000 metric route. What is going on?
Network Destination Netmask Gateway Interface Metric
0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 192.168.1.1 192.168.1.2 26
0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 10.0.0.1 10.1.105.2 1000
Even I have done the following:
In my Adapter Settings (Control PanelNetwork and InternetNetwork Connections) Advanced Settings Changed the order of the connections so that my connection priority is top on the list over Cisco AnyConnect VPN.
Still If i tracert google.com, still my traffic going over VPN.
Where is the concept of preferring lower cost matrix?
can someone explain to me, what is going over here?
If someone wants to say Cisco AnyConnect Client is playing here behind the scene,
Shall I no more believe on my route print output's?
Shall I no more believe on concept of preferring lower metric value over higher ones?
please, I want to have my doubts clear.
networking vpn routing cisco-vpn-client split-tunnel
asked Sep 22 '13 at 9:30
Ashish Kataria
19114
Did you try flush router cash?netsh interface ip delete destinationcache
– not2qubit
Mar 31 '14 at 16:13
add a comment |
After Connecting to Cisco VPN AnyConnect, Now I have two network interfaces having set same default routes, but with different metric values. Even after manually changing/raising the metric value of one default route(i.e. imposed by VPN from metric value 2 to 1000) to give preference to my default route(metric value 26), it's still preferring the VPN one(instead of raising the VPN route metric value from 2 to 1000 as you can see in route print output)
Here is my route print output:
route print
===========================================================================
Interface List
10...90 4c e5 58 9f 09 ......Atheros AR9285 802.11b/g/n WiFi Adapter
20...00 05 9a 3c 7a 00 ......Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client Virtual M
niport Adapter for Windows
===========================================================================
IPv4 Route Table
===========================================================================
Active Routes:
Network Destination Netmask Gateway Interface Metric
0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 192.168.1.1 192.168.1.2 26
0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 10.0.0.1 10.1.105.2 1000
10.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 On-link 10.1.105.2 1255
10.1.105.2 255.255.255.255 On-link 10.1.105.2 1255
10.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 10.1.105.2 1255
127.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 On-link 127.0.0.1 306
127.0.0.1 255.255.255.255 On-link 127.0.0.1 306
127.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 127.0.0.1 306
164.100.28.5 255.255.255.255 192.168.1.1 192.168.1.2 26
164.100.176.115 255.255.255.255 192.168.1.1 192.168.1.2 26
192.168.1.0 255.255.255.0 On-link 192.168.1.2 281
192.168.1.1 255.255.255.255 On-link 192.168.1.2 26
192.168.1.2 255.255.255.255 On-link 192.168.1.2 281
192.168.1.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 192.168.1.2 281
224.0.0.0 240.0.0.0 On-link 127.0.0.1 306
224.0.0.0 240.0.0.0 On-link 192.168.1.2 281
224.0.0.0 240.0.0.0 On-link 10.1.105.2 1255
255.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 127.0.0.1 306
255.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 192.168.1.2 281
255.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 10.1.105.2 1255
===========================================================================
Persistent Routes:
Network Address Netmask Gateway Address Metric
0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 10.0.0.1 999
===========================================================================
IPv6 Route Table
===========================================================================
Active Routes:
If Metric Network Destination Gateway
23 58 ::/0 On-link
1 306 ::1/128 On-link
23 306 2001:0:9d38:6abd:348b:29cb:f5fe:96fd/128
On-link
23 306 fe80::348b:29cb:f5fe:96fd/128
On-link
1 306 ff00::/8 On-link
23 306 ff00::/8 On-link
===========================================================================
Persistent Routes:
None
I doubted of this Persistent route entry block which is there in output above as:
Persistent Routes:
Network Address Netmask Gateway Address Metric
0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 10.0.0.1 999
But after issuing the below delete route command as:
route delete 0.0.0.0 mask 0.0.0.0 192.168.1.1
Now Persistent route entry has gone, its displaying as None.
As you see, Even Metric is 26 which is much lower than 1000, it's still following 1000 metric route. What is going on?
Network Destination Netmask Gateway Interface Metric
0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 192.168.1.1 192.168.1.2 26
0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 10.0.0.1 10.1.105.2 1000
Even I have done the following:
In my Adapter Settings (Control PanelNetwork and InternetNetwork Connections) Advanced Settings Changed the order of the connections so that my connection priority is top on the list over Cisco AnyConnect VPN.
Still If i tracert google.com, still my traffic going over VPN.
Where is the concept of preferring lower cost matrix?
can someone explain to me, what is going over here?
If someone wants to say Cisco AnyConnect Client is playing here behind the scene,
Shall I no more believe on my route print output's?
Shall I no more believe on concept of preferring lower metric value over higher ones?
please, I want to have my doubts clear.
networking vpn routing cisco-vpn-client split-tunnel
asked Sep 22 '13 at 9:30
Ashish Kataria
19114
After Connecting to Cisco VPN AnyConnect, Now I have two network interfaces having set same default routes, but with different metric values. Even after manually changing/raising the metric value of one default route(i.e. imposed by VPN from metric value 2 to 1000) to give preference to my default route(metric value 26), it's still preferring the VPN one(instead of raising the VPN route metric value from 2 to 1000 as you can see in route print output)
Here is my route print output:
route print
===========================================================================
Interface List
10...90 4c e5 58 9f 09 ......Atheros AR9285 802.11b/g/n WiFi Adapter
20...00 05 9a 3c 7a 00 ......Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client Virtual M
niport Adapter for Windows
===========================================================================
IPv4 Route Table
===========================================================================
Active Routes:
Network Destination Netmask Gateway Interface Metric
0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 192.168.1.1 192.168.1.2 26
0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 10.0.0.1 10.1.105.2 1000
10.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 On-link 10.1.105.2 1255
10.1.105.2 255.255.255.255 On-link 10.1.105.2 1255
10.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 10.1.105.2 1255
127.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 On-link 127.0.0.1 306
127.0.0.1 255.255.255.255 On-link 127.0.0.1 306
127.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 127.0.0.1 306
164.100.28.5 255.255.255.255 192.168.1.1 192.168.1.2 26
164.100.176.115 255.255.255.255 192.168.1.1 192.168.1.2 26
192.168.1.0 255.255.255.0 On-link 192.168.1.2 281
192.168.1.1 255.255.255.255 On-link 192.168.1.2 26
192.168.1.2 255.255.255.255 On-link 192.168.1.2 281
192.168.1.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 192.168.1.2 281
224.0.0.0 240.0.0.0 On-link 127.0.0.1 306
224.0.0.0 240.0.0.0 On-link 192.168.1.2 281
224.0.0.0 240.0.0.0 On-link 10.1.105.2 1255
255.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 127.0.0.1 306
255.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 192.168.1.2 281
255.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 10.1.105.2 1255
===========================================================================
Persistent Routes:
Network Address Netmask Gateway Address Metric
0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 10.0.0.1 999
===========================================================================
IPv6 Route Table
===========================================================================
Active Routes:
If Metric Network Destination Gateway
23 58 ::/0 On-link
1 306 ::1/128 On-link
23 306 2001:0:9d38:6abd:348b:29cb:f5fe:96fd/128
On-link
23 306 fe80::348b:29cb:f5fe:96fd/128
On-link
1 306 ff00::/8 On-link
23 306 ff00::/8 On-link
===========================================================================
Persistent Routes:
None
I doubted of this Persistent route entry block which is there in output above as:
Persistent Routes:
Network Address Netmask Gateway Address Metric
0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 10.0.0.1 999
But after issuing the below delete route command as:
route delete 0.0.0.0 mask 0.0.0.0 192.168.1.1
Now Persistent route entry has gone, its displaying as None.
As you see, Even Metric is 26 which is much lower than 1000, it's still following 1000 metric route. What is going on?
Network Destination Netmask Gateway Interface Metric
0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 192.168.1.1 192.168.1.2 26
0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 10.0.0.1 10.1.105.2 1000
Even I have done the following:
In my Adapter Settings (Control PanelNetwork and InternetNetwork Connections) Advanced Settings Changed the order of the connections so that my connection priority is top on the list over Cisco AnyConnect VPN.
Still If i tracert google.com, still my traffic going over VPN.
Where is the concept of preferring lower cost matrix?
can someone explain to me, what is going over here?
If someone wants to say Cisco AnyConnect Client is playing here behind the scene,
Shall I no more believe on my route print output's?
Shall I no more believe on concept of preferring lower metric value over higher ones?
please, I want to have my doubts clear.
networking vpn routing cisco-vpn-client split-tunnel
networking vpn routing cisco-vpn-client split-tunnel
asked Sep 22 '13 at 9:30
Ashish Kataria
19114
asked Sep 22 '13 at 9:30
Ashish Kataria
19114
asked Sep 22 '13 at 9:30
Ashish Kataria
19114
asked Sep 22 '13 at 9:30
Ashish Kataria
19114
asked Sep 22 '13 at 9:30
Ashish Kataria
19114
19114
Did you try flush router cash?netsh interface ip delete destinationcache
– not2qubit
Mar 31 '14 at 16:13
add a comment |
Did you try flush router cash?netsh interface ip delete destinationcache
– not2qubit
Mar 31 '14 at 16:13
Did you try flush router cash?
netsh interface ip delete destinationcache– not2qubit
Mar 31 '14 at 16:13
Did you try flush router cash?
netsh interface ip delete destinationcache– not2qubit
Mar 31 '14 at 16:13
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
This is likely due to the configurations on the Cisco VPN device you are connecting to not allowing split tunneling. When you disconnect from the VPN the traffic likely utilizes your connection. When you connect to the VPN via the Ciscoanyconnect client, it receives directions from the cisco vpn device to not allow split tuneling, i.e. only allow traffic to come to this device via the tunnel and we will route it from here, so any traffic outside of that remote network is routed from and subjected to, the same security as if you were physically sitting at a location within the network. This is just an assumption, I am not familiar with the setup of the VPN device you are connecting to.
answered Sep 25 '13 at 1:53
PiBz
1
I know very well that split tunneling is disabled by admin, that's why i am looking to modify routes, but cisco Anyconnect client is sitting like watchguard over my pc and reconnects itself whenever i modify routes... How it comes to know about this modification of routes. This client has taken over my admin windows control..I am no more admin..It's like something sitting and reverts back all my modifications...How is it spying over my computer? There must be something it's been doing on my pc for this spying, and not allowing to modify routes.
– Ashish Kataria
Sep 26 '13 at 5:23
forget vpn side, I feel this is not the right way to take over admin control of windows users... How to stop this client from spying on my windows route table?
– Ashish Kataria
Sep 26 '13 at 5:27
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "3"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fsuperuser.com%2fquestions%2f648702%2fmanually-setting-interface-metric-priority-of-network-adapters-not-preferring-lo%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
This is likely due to the configurations on the Cisco VPN device you are connecting to not allowing split tunneling. When you disconnect from the VPN the traffic likely utilizes your connection. When you connect to the VPN via the Ciscoanyconnect client, it receives directions from the cisco vpn device to not allow split tuneling, i.e. only allow traffic to come to this device via the tunnel and we will route it from here, so any traffic outside of that remote network is routed from and subjected to, the same security as if you were physically sitting at a location within the network. This is just an assumption, I am not familiar with the setup of the VPN device you are connecting to.
answered Sep 25 '13 at 1:53
PiBz
1
I know very well that split tunneling is disabled by admin, that's why i am looking to modify routes, but cisco Anyconnect client is sitting like watchguard over my pc and reconnects itself whenever i modify routes... How it comes to know about this modification of routes. This client has taken over my admin windows control..I am no more admin..It's like something sitting and reverts back all my modifications...How is it spying over my computer? There must be something it's been doing on my pc for this spying, and not allowing to modify routes.
– Ashish Kataria
Sep 26 '13 at 5:23
forget vpn side, I feel this is not the right way to take over admin control of windows users... How to stop this client from spying on my windows route table?
– Ashish Kataria
Sep 26 '13 at 5:27
add a comment |
This is likely due to the configurations on the Cisco VPN device you are connecting to not allowing split tunneling. When you disconnect from the VPN the traffic likely utilizes your connection. When you connect to the VPN via the Ciscoanyconnect client, it receives directions from the cisco vpn device to not allow split tuneling, i.e. only allow traffic to come to this device via the tunnel and we will route it from here, so any traffic outside of that remote network is routed from and subjected to, the same security as if you were physically sitting at a location within the network. This is just an assumption, I am not familiar with the setup of the VPN device you are connecting to.
answered Sep 25 '13 at 1:53
PiBz
1
I know very well that split tunneling is disabled by admin, that's why i am looking to modify routes, but cisco Anyconnect client is sitting like watchguard over my pc and reconnects itself whenever i modify routes... How it comes to know about this modification of routes. This client has taken over my admin windows control..I am no more admin..It's like something sitting and reverts back all my modifications...How is it spying over my computer? There must be something it's been doing on my pc for this spying, and not allowing to modify routes.
– Ashish Kataria
Sep 26 '13 at 5:23
forget vpn side, I feel this is not the right way to take over admin control of windows users... How to stop this client from spying on my windows route table?
– Ashish Kataria
Sep 26 '13 at 5:27
add a comment |
This is likely due to the configurations on the Cisco VPN device you are connecting to not allowing split tunneling. When you disconnect from the VPN the traffic likely utilizes your connection. When you connect to the VPN via the Ciscoanyconnect client, it receives directions from the cisco vpn device to not allow split tuneling, i.e. only allow traffic to come to this device via the tunnel and we will route it from here, so any traffic outside of that remote network is routed from and subjected to, the same security as if you were physically sitting at a location within the network. This is just an assumption, I am not familiar with the setup of the VPN device you are connecting to.
answered Sep 25 '13 at 1:53
PiBz
1
This is likely due to the configurations on the Cisco VPN device you are connecting to not allowing split tunneling. When you disconnect from the VPN the traffic likely utilizes your connection. When you connect to the VPN via the Ciscoanyconnect client, it receives directions from the cisco vpn device to not allow split tuneling, i.e. only allow traffic to come to this device via the tunnel and we will route it from here, so any traffic outside of that remote network is routed from and subjected to, the same security as if you were physically sitting at a location within the network. This is just an assumption, I am not familiar with the setup of the VPN device you are connecting to.
answered Sep 25 '13 at 1:53
PiBz
1
answered Sep 25 '13 at 1:53
PiBz
1
answered Sep 25 '13 at 1:53
PiBz
1
answered Sep 25 '13 at 1:53
PiBz
1
1
I know very well that split tunneling is disabled by admin, that's why i am looking to modify routes, but cisco Anyconnect client is sitting like watchguard over my pc and reconnects itself whenever i modify routes... How it comes to know about this modification of routes. This client has taken over my admin windows control..I am no more admin..It's like something sitting and reverts back all my modifications...How is it spying over my computer? There must be something it's been doing on my pc for this spying, and not allowing to modify routes.
– Ashish Kataria
Sep 26 '13 at 5:23
forget vpn side, I feel this is not the right way to take over admin control of windows users... How to stop this client from spying on my windows route table?
– Ashish Kataria
Sep 26 '13 at 5:27
add a comment |
I know very well that split tunneling is disabled by admin, that's why i am looking to modify routes, but cisco Anyconnect client is sitting like watchguard over my pc and reconnects itself whenever i modify routes... How it comes to know about this modification of routes. This client has taken over my admin windows control..I am no more admin..It's like something sitting and reverts back all my modifications...How is it spying over my computer? There must be something it's been doing on my pc for this spying, and not allowing to modify routes.
– Ashish Kataria
Sep 26 '13 at 5:23
forget vpn side, I feel this is not the right way to take over admin control of windows users... How to stop this client from spying on my windows route table?
– Ashish Kataria
Sep 26 '13 at 5:27
I know very well that split tunneling is disabled by admin, that's why i am looking to modify routes, but cisco Anyconnect client is sitting like watchguard over my pc and reconnects itself whenever i modify routes... How it comes to know about this modification of routes. This client has taken over my admin windows control..I am no more admin..It's like something sitting and reverts back all my modifications...How is it spying over my computer? There must be something it's been doing on my pc for this spying, and not allowing to modify routes.
– Ashish Kataria
Sep 26 '13 at 5:23
I know very well that split tunneling is disabled by admin, that's why i am looking to modify routes, but cisco Anyconnect client is sitting like watchguard over my pc and reconnects itself whenever i modify routes... How it comes to know about this modification of routes. This client has taken over my admin windows control..I am no more admin..It's like something sitting and reverts back all my modifications...How is it spying over my computer? There must be something it's been doing on my pc for this spying, and not allowing to modify routes.
– Ashish Kataria
Sep 26 '13 at 5:23
forget vpn side, I feel this is not the right way to take over admin control of windows users... How to stop this client from spying on my windows route table?
– Ashish Kataria
Sep 26 '13 at 5:27
forget vpn side, I feel this is not the right way to take over admin control of windows users... How to stop this client from spying on my windows route table?
– Ashish Kataria
Sep 26 '13 at 5:27
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Super User!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fsuperuser.com%2fquestions%2f648702%2fmanually-setting-interface-metric-priority-of-network-adapters-not-preferring-lo%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Did you try flush router cash?
netsh interface ip delete destinationcache– not2qubit
Mar 31 '14 at 16:13