Yes, I think so.

At site B, a Route Policy entry would send traffic destined for Site C to Site A.

Arguably though, what you have done is better, in that the (unnecessary) overhead of routing via Site A is avoided. (As the number of sites increases, such a topology would rapidly get out of hand though - with a myriad of inter-connections soon being required).

Yes I can see that my solution is not very extensible but as it is unlikely that we will have additional sites I'm not to concerned at the moment. I would like to try and get it working correctly just because I know what I have done is not really correct.

I thought I had tried the solution you suggest but I could not get it to work.

Route policy at Site C sending traffic for site B to site A
Traffic arriving at Site A destined for Site B is handled by the existing VPN route
Route policy at Site B sending traffic for site C to site A
Traffic arriving at Site A destined for Site C is handled by the existing VPN route

This looks correct to me but it just does not seem to work.

I may have another look at it this weekend when it's not being used.
Thanks

Gegg wrote:
This looks correct to me...

Agreed.

The other place you could try, is in the "More" section of the LAN-to-LAN VPN definition. (Add Site B's address range to the definition at Site C and vice-versa). You could also check that the "RIP Direction" is not set to 'Disabled' at the same time. (I'm not entirely sure of the ramifications of RIP in one direction only...)

As a matter of interest, does Traceroute indicate that the routing is set correctly; as seen from Site B and Site C? - does the traffic head off to Site A?

hornbyp wrote:

Gegg wrote:
This looks correct to me...

Agreed.

The other place you could try, is in the "More" section of the LAN-to-LAN VPN definition. (Add Site B's address range to the definition at Site C and vice-versa). You could also check that the "RIP Direction" is not set to 'Disabled' at the same time. (I'm not entirely sure of the ramifications of RIP in one direction only...)

As a matter of interest, does Traceroute indicate that the routing is set correctly; as seen from Site B and Site C? - does the traffic head off to Site A?

Just thought i would say thank you for this post, i was having the exact same issue, and through the "More" setting, i could get my sites all talking together. Tracert shows the traffic heads via site A