NAT 0 0 nat nat static ACLs

Similar Questions

• ASA 5505 8.41 dynamic configuration NAT NAT/static

  Hello

  I am having some problems of configuration statements NAT on my ASA5505 which has recently been upgraded to 8.41.

  I have a unique dynamic IP on the external interface of the ASA and wish that all internal hosts NAT/Pat it. In addition, I would like to have multiple ports 'sent' to internal hosts, one of which is TCP/4343. With the current configuration guests originate from the external interface correctly, but the service running on TCP/4343 is not accessible from the outside. See the output of the command below:

  exit "sh run object:

  network of the object DrJones
  Home 10.81.220.90
  network of the LAN object - 10.81.220.0
  10.81.220.0 subnet 255.255.255.0

  exit "sh run nat:

  network of the object DrJones
  NAT (inside, outside) interface static 4343 4343 tcp service
  network of the LAN object - 10.81.220.0
  NAT dynamic interface (indoor, outdoor)

  exit "sh run access-list":

  access extensive list ip 10.81.220.0 inside_access_in allow 255.255.255.0 any
  outside_access_in list extended access permit icmp any any echo response
  outside_access_in list extended access permit tcp any interface outside eq 4343

  Any help would be appreciated, if additional information is needed please let me know and I'll post it.

  Thank you in advance.

  Hi Mitch,

  There are two major changes between 8.3 - pre and post - 8.3.

  1 NAT

  2 interface Access-list.

  You went directly to step 1, but have set up the pre - 8.3 outside_access_in access list.

  The correct config would be:

  outside_access_in list extended access permit icmp any any echo-reply //you can remove this and add inspect icmp to the overall strategy.
  outside_access_in list extended access permit tcp any host 10.81.220.90 eq 4343

  8.3 and above, the access list interface should have the real ip and not the ip translated.

  I hope this helps.

  -Shrikant

  P.S.: Please check the question as answered if it was resolved. Note the useful messages. Thank you.

• Problem of NAT or ACL?

  Hello

  I have a Cisco 850 running 12.4 (2) with a tunnel of L2L existing to another Cisco router. I try to add remote access to the Cisco 850 and I have, what, in my view, is an ACL or NAT problem. I can connect to the 850 with the VPN client and get an address from the pool, but I can't ping in the internal network. Any help is appreciated. Here is my config:

  Your NAT ACL 101 must refuse the IP with internal IP remote VPN hen 10.2.199.x.

• local host to access the vpn site to site with nat static configured

  I have two 881 routers with vpn site to site between them. I have a static nat on the router for a Web server that is accessible from the internet. I can't access the Web server through the vpn. All other traffic is fine its VPN. I think that there is a problem with the NAT. Here are the relevant configuration lines.

  IP nat inside source overload map route SDM_RMAP_1 interface FastEthernet4
  IP nat inside source static 192.168.150.2 bonnefin map route SDM_RMAP_1

  allowed SDM_RMAP_1 1 route map
  corresponds to the IP 100

  access-list 100 deny ip 192.168.150.0 0.0.0.255 192.168.123.0 0.0.0.255
  access-list 100 permit ip 192.168.150.0 0.0.0.255 any

  You should be able to access the web server with its IP private (192.168.150.2) through the VPN connection.

  If you just add the VPN and the road map, try to clear the existing translation and see if you can access it via its private of the Remote LAN VPN ip address.

• L2l VPN with NAT static to hide the IP internal on Cisco 1841 ISR

  I configured a VPN L2L on a Cisco 1841 ISR.  I'm statically from some of my internal hosts to IPS that are included in encrypted traffic.  Please note that not all internal hosts are underway using a NAT.  I am doing this for hidden some of the actual IP addresses on the inside network.  I confirmed that the VPN works as well as natives of VPN traffic.  I configured VPN L2L traditionally on the Cisco ASA 5500 Series devices, and this is my first attempt with HIA of 1841.  I want just the other to take a glance to see if I missed something, or could I effectively part of the configuration.  All comments are welcome.

  VPN-RTR-01 #show run
  Building configuration...

  Current configuration: 9316 bytes
  !
  version 12.4
  horodateurs service debug datetime msec
  Log service timestamps datetime msec
  encryption password service
  !
  hostname VPN-RTR-01
  !
  boot-start-marker
  boot-end-marker
  !
  ! type map necessary for vwic/slot-slot 0/0 control
  logging buffered 51200 warnings
  no console logging
  enable secret 5 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  enable password 7 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  !
  No aaa new-model
  IP cef
  !
  !
  !
  !
  no ip domain search
  property intellectual auth-proxy max-nodata-& 3
  property intellectual admission max-nodata-& 3
  !
  !
  Crypto pki trustpoint TP-self-signed-2010810276
  enrollment selfsigned
  name of the object cn = IOS - Self - signed - certificate - 2010810276
  revocation checking no
  rsakeypair TP-self-signed-2010810276
  !
  !
  TP-self-signed-2010810276 crypto pki certificate chain
  certificate self-signed 01
  30820246 308201AF A0030201 02020101 300 D 0609 2A 864886 F70D0101 04050030
  2 060355 04031326 494F532D 53656 C 66 2 AND 536967 6E65642D 43657274 31312F30
  69666963 32303130 38313032 6174652D 3736301E 31393334 OF 30333131 170 3131
  30365A 17 0D 323030 31303130 30303030 305A 3031 06035504 03132649 312F302D
  4F532D53 5369676E 656C662D 43 65727469 66696361 74652 32 30313038 65642D
  31303237 3630819F 300 D 0609 2A 864886 01050003, 818, 0030, 81890281 F70D0101
  8100C3FF F5EADA3B BCB06873 5577DB24 2AD8ECBB 00D53F1A 37342E2E 5CC9202A
  7F128E51 016CD6EC D8734F4D 28BE8B0A FCD6B714 8D13585B 7844C09C 79BA8F13
  B75E4E98 25D91F02 A4773F66 83407A8B 85447 64 A6889DD9 6085857F 737F8A9F
  749F4297 8804C4F3 D28A6C33 F4137BBE 67F9B945 F239789E 1303AD6D DB98B7E2
  52B 50203 010001 HAS 3 1 130101 FF040530 030101FF 30190603 0F060355 6E306C30
  551 1104 12301082 0E535458 2D56504E 2 525452 2 303130 1 230418 1F060355 D
  3B 232987 30168014 2CBB9DD0 B34B7243 7F8095C8 7AFBEFE3 301D 0603 551D0E04
  1604143B 2329872C BB9DD0B3 4B72437F 8095C87A FBEFE330 0D06092A 864886F7
  010104 05000381 8100A 831 8E05114A DE8AF6C5 4CB45914 36B6427C 42B30F07 0D
  C5C47BC9 0110BCAA A985CB3F 5CBB855B B12D3225 B8021234 86D1952C 655071E4
  66C18F42 F84492A9 835DE884 341B3A95 A3CED4E8 F37E7609 88F52640 741D74D2
  37842 D 39 E5F2B208 0D4D57E1 C5633DEB ACDFC897 7D50683D 05B5FDAA E42714B4
  DD29E815 E9F90877 4 D 68
  quit smoking
  username privilege 15 password 7 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx lhocin
  username privilege 15 password 7 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx jsmith
  !
  !
  !
  !
  crypto ISAKMP policy 5
  BA aes 256
  preshared authentication
  Group 2
  lifetime 28800
  xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx key address 172.21.0.1 crypto ISAKMP xauth No.
  !
  !
  Crypto ipsec transform-set ESP-AES256-SHA esp - aes 256 esp-sha-hmac
  !
  card crypto SITES REMOTE VPN-ipsec-isakmp 1
  defined by peer 172.21.0.1
  game of transformation-ESP-AES256-SHA
  match address VPN-REMOTE-SITE
  !
  !
  !
  interface FastEthernet0/0
  no ip address
  automatic speed
  full-duplex
  No mop enabled
  !
  interface FastEthernet0/0.1
  encapsulation dot1Q 1 native
  !
  interface FastEthernet0/0.2
  Description $FW_INSIDE$
  encapsulation dot1Q 61
  IP 10.1.0.34 255.255.255.224
  IP access-group 100 to
  IP nat inside
  IP virtual-reassembly
  !
  interface FastEthernet0/0.3
  Description $FW_OUTSIDE$
  encapsulation dot1Q 111
  IP 172.20.32.17 255.255.255.224
  IP access-group 101 in
  Check IP unicast reverse path
  NAT outside IP
  IP virtual-reassembly
  crypto VPN-REMOTE-SITE map
  !
  interface FastEthernet0/1
  no ip address
  Shutdown
  automatic duplex
  automatic speed
  !
  IP forward-Protocol ND
  IP route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 172.20.32.1
  IP route 10.16.0.0 255.255.0.0 10.1.0.33
  IP route 10.19.0.0 255.255.0.0 10.1.0.33
  IP route 10.191.0.0 255.255.0.0 10.1.0.33
  IP route 10.192.0.0 255.255.0.0 10.1.0.33
  IP route 192.168.20.48 255.255.255.240 10.1.0.33
  !
  !
  IP http server
  local IP http authentication
  IP http secure server
  IP http timeout policy inactive 600 life 86400 request 10000
  IP nat inside source map route NO_NAT interface FastEthernet0/0.3 overload
  IP nat inside source static 10.191.0.11 192.168.20.54 STATIC_NAT_7 card expandable route
  IP nat inside source static 10.191.0.12 192.168.20.55 STATIC_NAT_8 card expandable route
  IP nat inside source static 10.192.1.1 192.168.20.56 STATIC_NAT_1 card expandable route
  IP nat inside source static 10.192.1.2 192.168.20.57 STATIC_NAT_2 card expandable route
  IP nat inside source static 10.192.1.3 192.168.20.58 STATIC_NAT_3 card expandable route
  IP nat inside source static 10.192.1.4 192.168.20.59 STATIC_NAT_4 card expandable route
  IP nat inside source static 10.192.1.5 192.168.20.61 STATIC_NAT_5 card expandable route
  IP nat inside source static 10.16.1.6 192.168.20.62 STATIC_NAT_6 card expandable route
  !
  VPN-REMOTE-SITE extended IP access list
  IP 192.168.20.48 allow the host 0.0.0.15 10.174.52.39
  IP 192.168.20.48 allow the host 0.0.0.15 10.174.52.40
  inside_nat_static_1 extended IP access list
  permit ip host 10.192.1.1 10.174.52.39
  permit ip host 10.192.1.1 10.174.52.40
  refuse an entire ip
  inside_nat_static_2 extended IP access list
  permit ip host 10.192.1.2 10.174.52.39
  permit ip host 10.192.1.2 10.174.52.40
  refuse an entire ip
  inside_nat_static_3 extended IP access list
  permit ip host 10.192.1.3 10.174.52.39
  permit ip host 10.192.1.3 10.174.52.40
  refuse an entire ip
  inside_nat_static_4 extended IP access list
  permit ip host 10.192.1.4 10.174.52.39
  permit ip host 10.192.1.4 10.174.52.40
  refuse an entire ip
  inside_nat_static_5 extended IP access list
  permit ip host 10.192.1.5 10.174.52.39
  permit ip host 10.192.1.5 10.174.52.40
  refuse an entire ip
  inside_nat_static_6 extended IP access list
  permit ip host 10.16.1.6 10.174.52.39
  permit ip host 10.16.1.6 10.174.52.40
  refuse an entire ip
  inside_nat_static_7 extended IP access list
  permit ip host 10.191.0.11 10.174.52.39
  permit ip host 10.191.0.11 10.174.52.40
  refuse an entire ip
  inside_nat_static_8 extended IP access list
  permit ip host 10.191.0.12 10.174.52.39
  permit ip host 10.191.0.12 10.174.52.40
  refuse an entire ip
  !
  access-list 100 remark self-generated by the configuration of the firewall SDM
  Access-list 100 = 1 SDM_ACL category note
  access-list 100 deny ip 172.20.32.0 0.0.0.31 all
  access-list 100 deny ip 255.255.255.255 host everything
  access-list 100 deny ip 127.0.0.0 0.255.255.255 everything
  access ip-list 100 permit a whole
  Remark SDM_ACL category of access list 101 = 17
  access-list 101 permit udp any host 192.168.20.62
  access-list 101 permit tcp any host 192.168.20.62
  access-list 101 permit udp any host 192.168.20.61
  access-list 101 permit tcp any host 192.168.20.61
  access-list 101 permit udp any host 192.168.20.59
  access-list 101 permit tcp any host 192.168.20.59
  access-list 101 permit udp any host 192.168.20.58
  access-list 101 permit tcp any host 192.168.20.58
  access-list 101 permit udp any host 192.168.20.57
  access-list 101 permit tcp any host 192.168.20.57
  access-list 101 permit udp any host 192.168.20.56
  access-list 101 permit tcp any host 192.168.20.56
  access-list 101 permit udp any host 192.168.20.55
  access-list 101 permit tcp any host 192.168.20.55
  access-list 101 permit udp any host 192.168.20.54
  access-list 101 permit tcp any host 192.168.20.54
  access-list 101 permit ip 10.174.52.40 host 192.168.20.48 0.0.0.15
  access-list 101 permit ip 10.174.52.39 host 192.168.20.48 0.0.0.15
  access-list 101 permit udp host 172.21.0.1 host 172.20.32.17 eq non500-isakmp
  access-list 101 permit udp host 172.21.0.1 host 172.20.32.17 eq isakmp
  access-list 101 permit esp 172.21.0.1 host 172.20.32.17
  access-list 101 permit ahp host 172.21.0.1 172.20.32.17
  access-list 101 permit icmp any host 172.20.32.17 - response
  access-list 101 permit icmp any host 172.20.32.17 time limit
  access-list 101 permit icmp any unreachable host 172.20.32.17
  access-list 101 permit udp any host isakmp 172.20.32.17 newspaper eq
  access-list 101 permit udp any host 172.20.32.17 eq non500-isakmp
  access-list 101 permit tcp any host 172.20.32.17 eq 443
  access-list 101 permit tcp any host 172.20.32.17 eq 22
  access-list 101 permit tcp any host 172.20.32.17 eq cmd
  access-list 101 deny ip 10.1.0.32 0.0.0.31 all
  access-list 101 deny ip 10.0.0.0 0.255.255.255 everything
  access-list 101 deny ip 172.16.0.0 0.15.255.255 all
  access-list 101 deny ip 192.168.0.0 0.0.255.255 everything
  access-list 101 deny ip 127.0.0.0 0.255.255.255 everything
  access-list 101 deny ip 255.255.255.255 host everything
  access-list 101 deny host ip 0.0.0.0 everything
  access-list 101 deny ip any any newspaper
  access-list 102 deny ip 192.168.20.48 0.0.0.15 host 10.174.52.40
  access-list 102 deny ip 192.168.20.48 0.0.0.15 host 10.174.52.39
  access-list 102 permit ip 10.1.0.32 0.0.0.31 all
  !
  allowed NO_NAT 1 route map
  corresponds to the IP 102
  !
  STATIC_NAT_8 allowed 10 route map
  inside_nat_static_8 match ip address
  !
  STATIC_NAT_5 allowed 10 route map
  inside_nat_static_5 match ip address
  !
  STATIC_NAT_4 allowed 10 route map
  inside_nat_static_4 match ip address
  !
  STATIC_NAT_7 allowed 10 route map
  inside_nat_static_7 match ip address
  !
  STATIC_NAT_6 allowed 10 route map
  inside_nat_static_6 match ip address
  !
  STATIC_NAT_1 allowed 10 route map
  inside_nat_static_1 match ip address
  !
  STATIC_NAT_3 allowed 10 route map
  inside_nat_static_3 match ip address
  !
  STATIC_NAT_2 allowed 10 route map
  inside_nat_static_2 match ip address
  !
  !
  !
  control plan
  !
  !
  !
  Line con 0
  exec-timeout 30 0
  line to 0
  line vty 0 4
  privilege level 15
  local connection
  transport input telnet ssh
  line vty 5 15
  privilege level 15
  local connection
  transport input telnet ssh
  !
  Scheduler allocate 20000 1000
  end

  VPN-RTR-01 #.

  Hello

  Configuration looks ok to me.

  yet you can cross-reference with the following link:

  http://www.Cisco.com/en/us/Tech/tk583/TK372/technologies_configuration_example09186a0080223a59.shtml

  I hope this helps.

  Kind regards

  Anisha

  P.S.: Please mark this thread as answered if you feel that your query is resolved. Note the useful messages.

• Static nat and NAT ACL 0

  All,

  I have nat 0 ACL indicating that an ip address should not be natted, while a static nat statement saying we need natted. I just want to know that we will have precedence.

  Thank you

  It is of the order of operations PIX nat / ASA.

  the NAT 0 acl_name (nameif) has priority.

  1 nat 0-list of access (free from nat)

  2. match the existing xlates

  3. match the static controls

  a. static NAT with no access list

  b. static PAT with no access list

  4. match orders nat

  a. nat [id] access-list (first match)

  b. nat [id] [address] [mask] (best match)

  i. If the ID is 0, create an xlate identity

  II. use global pool for dynamic NAT

  III. use global dynamic pool for PAT

• PIX NAT and STATIC commands

  Hello

  My script is

  Inside (LAN) (172.16.x.x) - DMZ (172.29.1.x)

  I would like to provide access to internal network to the DMZ. In addition to the ACL configuration, I can do this by using the following two methods. What are the advantage\dis advantage of each method

  static (inside, dmz) 172.16.0.0 172.16.0.0 255.255.0.0 subnet mask

  OR

  access-list ip 172.16.0.0 sheep allow 255.255.0.0 172.29.1.0 255.255.255.0

  NAT (inside) 0 access-list sheep

  What is the difference between these two?

  Hello

  Function of static and nat (inside) ACL 0 is the same, that is, traffic from inside the demilitarized zone and the opposite would be allowed. The real difference is, when configuring nat (inside) ACL 0, you are really turn off the nat for this traffic engine altogther. Using the static, you disable the nat on the pix engine, turn PIX translations sort of mistakes, as real sense his translation TI. Note: nat (inside) 0 0 0 is different from nat (inside) ACL 0. With ACL option, you can connect the two sector, with only nat (inside) 0 0 its only from the inside to the dmz, dmz inside No. In a moderated network environment, you won't see much difference in terms of performance. It's just depends on condition, you prefer one over the other.

  I hope that its clear! Thank you

  Renault

• PIX - static NAT problems

  I'm doing a static route to xxx.242.139.164 to 192.168.1.13 and open ports 25 and 443. I am at a loss for what I missed to make this happen. I would also like to open the ICMP traffic or at the least response to echo so I can test the IP addresses and that doesn't seem to work either.

  PIX config attached .txt file.

  Thanks for any help!

  Hi Comoms,

  This is your problem:

  (1) here say you do not NAT traffic.

  NAT (inside) 0-list of access inside_outbound_nat0_acl

  inside_outbound_nat0_acl ip access list allow any xxx.242.139.160 255.255.255.224

  (2) then you use it for the static NAT.

  public static xxx.242.139.164 (Interior, exterior) 192.168.1.13 dns netmask 255.255.255.255 0 0

  (3) it's totally fake, first u say don't not NAT traffic, try you NAT, it. How will it work?

  (4) even if uou help with ACL, it won't work.

  (5) Please check your routes n NAT ACL, NAT STATIC, once again.

  HTH

  MAR

• Dual active/passive failover of ISP with static Nat on Cisco 1941

  Hello world

  I'm working on a configuration of a client and I have everything in place right now except the NAT' static ing.  The config fails during an ISP to another and track als and routes by default static weighted, the PAT rocking with course to each interface maps.  It is, is it possible to switch on the large amount of static NAT entries to the ISP of backup?  So far, everything I've read said no because you can have only one entry per ip/port combo, other than another configuration static NAT double server with a different IP address.  I just want to be sure before making my recommendations, all thoughts are greatly appreciated.

  Thank you

  Brandon

  In fact, you can also long as you use standard NAT ("ip nat inside source static") or not NVI ('ip nat static source') for your attackers. You apply the roadmap by the end of the static NAT statement to indicate which interface it should apply to. So, if you have something like this:

   ip access-list extended ACL_NAT permit ip 192.168.0.0 255.255.255.0 any ! route-map RM_NAT_ISP1 match ip address ACL_NAT match interface GigabitEthernet0/1 ! route-map RM_NAT_ISP2 match ip address ACL_NAT match interface GigabitEthernet0/2 

  Using port 80/tcp for example, you can do this:

   ip nat inside source static tcp x.x.x.x 80 y.y.y.y 80 route-map RM_NAT_ISP1 ip nat inside source static tcp x.x.x.x 80 z.z.z.z 80 route-map RM_NAT_ISP2 

  Just replace x.x.x.x with the LAN address of the machine that you are shipping y.y.y.y with the WAN address you are shipping on isps1 and z.z.z.z with the address of the ISP WAN you are shipping on ISP2. The static NAT will be conditional on the roadmap, at this point.

  This works with TCP, UDP, and IP forwarding, but does not require that you use an IPv4 address to your WAN address. For some reason, it does not work if you use an interface... so if you're using dynamic addresses, it will be more complicated.

• Static NAT with the road map for excluding the VPN

  We have problems of access to certain IPs NATted static via a VPN.  After some research, we have learned that you have to exclude traffic destined for the VPN to the static NAT using a road map. So we did this:

  10.1.1.x is the VPN IP pool.

  access-list 130 refuse ip 192.168.1.0 0.0.0.255 10.1.1.0 0.0.0.255
  access-list 130 allow ip 192.168.1.0 0.0.0.255 any

  sheep allowed 10 route map
  corresponds to the IP 130

  IP nat inside source static 192.168.1.5 1.1.1.1 sheep map route

  Above worked to fix the VPN but the IP 192.168.1.5 is no longer publicly available via 1.1.1.1.  What seems to happen, is that the static NAT is not really work and this IP address is NATted with the IP of PAT.

  Any ideas on how to get this to work?

  Thank you
  Diego

  Hello

  The following example details exactly your case:

  http://www.Cisco.com/en/us/Tech/tk583/TK372/technologies_configuration_example09186a0080094634.shtml

  Try to replace the 192.168.1.0 subnet by the host address.

  It should work

  HTH

  Laurent.

• Static and NAT router to router VPN

  Hello

  I have two site VPN using routers. The VPN is fine, BUT - at the end of the seat, the customer has NAT entries static to allow incoming connections - any service that has a NAT static to allow incoming connections from the Internet is inaccessible in the same way. Ping, for example, doesn't have this problem because there is no static NAT entry. I tried to configure a route map-"No. - nat" according to the http://www.cisco.com/en/US/partner/tech/tk583/tk372/technologies_configuration_example09186a00800949ef.shtml , I thought I was working.

  H.O. has the IP 131.203.64.0/24 and 135.0.0.0/24 (I know, I know - I'm trying to change), and the R.O. 192.168.1.0/24.

  Bits of configuration:

  IP nat inside source overload map route SHEEP interface Ethernet0

  IP nat inside source static tcp 135.0.0.248 131.203.100.27 3389 3389 extensible

  (other static removed)

  Int-E0-In extended IP access list

  ip permit 192.168.1.0 0.0.0.255 any

  (other entries deleted)

  access-list 198 deny ip 131.203.64.0 0.0.0.255 192.168.1.0 0.0.0.255

  access-list 198 deny ip 135.0.0.0 0.0.0.255 192.168.1.0 0.0.0.255

  access-list 198 allow ip 135.0.0.0 0.0.0.255 any

  SHEEP allowed 10 route map

  corresponds to the IP 198

  1 remove the static entry for the specified host the VPN problem, but obviously breaks things :(

  2. as mentioned, the VPN itself works fine, I can ping hosts perfectly.

  Any help greatly appreciated :)

  Thank you

  Mike.

  You must use the option of the route to the static NAT map. This is a new feature in 12.2 (4) T according to this page:

  http://www.Cisco.com/univercd/CC/TD/doc/product/software/ios123/123cgcr/ipras_r/ip1_i2g.htm#1079180

  He must do exactly what you want. The old, another way to do is use "The thing", where you create a loopback interface and don't make a nat interface and use routing strategy for routing VPN traffic to one address on the same subnet as the loopback interface, but not the address of the loop. IOS then that réacheminera traffic to the real destination (in this case the remote VPN site), but since now it is not a 'ip nat inside' interface, the static nat translations does not apply and the VPN traffic will not be translated. The problem with this solution is that all loopback traffic is switched to the process, so it is a bit of a hack, but these things are sometimes necessary.

  HTH

• searching for NAT/Firewall/static routing tips

  Hello

  I am very new to vCloud network and security. I've read the documentation, but it can be confusing for me. I am attaching a schema to help provide a context for what I'm trying to achieve. Keep in mind that the IP address has been changed for security reasons. Address ranges are not accurate but for the context.

  We have an org routed with a single VM VAPP, directly connected to the VCC-Net. It is a Linux server. We have a vShield edge device. There is no rule of firewall, NAT, static routes configured. Essentially of deployment costs. The owner of the server wants to be able to connect to a Linux repo for updates/etc.

  For testing purposes, I have disabled the vShield firewall to allow all traffic through. from the Linux server, I was able to ping both addresses assigned to the border of vShield (192.168.1.1 and 10.10.16.17) but I couldn't ping 10.10.2.140. This leads me to believe the vShield Edge does not know how to route packets between 192.168.1.0/24 and 10.10.0.0/16.

  I have read and what I'm gathering is that I have to configure NAT and firewall rules to achieve. I googled everything I can, and now I'm just confused. Can someone please give me some advice?

  VShield Edge routing feature is similar to traditional router. By default, it can discover only directly attached networks and deliver packages, in this case 192.168.1.0/24 and 10.10.16.0/16 are direct networks. So if you need reach any other private network, we need to define a static route (it is not supported / configurable in vshield edges of dynamic routing since then). For Linux VM 192.168.1.10/24 join the public network, set a NAT NAT vShield edge rules and enable the appropriate firewall rules.

• NAT Ports inaccessible over the site to site VPN

  We have a series of 2900 SRI at HQ and several of Cisco WRVS4400N VPN routers to small branch offices. The branch offices are connected to HQ via IPSec site-to-site. Everything seems to work fine, except users in the box executive offices not access all the services on servers HQ where the port was NAT'd to the outside. For example, we organize Office services remotely via https, port 443 is NAT made appeal to the outside, but users in the branch offices cannot access this port. They receive a time-out error. I tried searching but all I can find is info on crossing IPSec NAT. thank you...

  With this config-NAT, your router ensures that the internal server has to be accessible by the public IP address. You can add a roadmap to your NAT static entry exempt of NAT VPN traffic. Which might look like the following:

  ip nat inside source static tcp 10.0.0.11 443 xxx.xxx.xxx.165 443 route-map SERVER-NAT extendable!ip access-list extended SERVER-NAT-ACL deny ip 10.0.0.0 0.255.255.255 10.0.0.0 0.255.255.255 permit ip any any!route-map SERVER-NAT permit 10 match ip address SERVER-NAT-ACL

• ASA 8.4 (1) source-nat over vpn site-to-site

  I'm setting up a tunnel vpn site-to-site and require nat for the local and remote side. The remote side will be nat to

  10.2.255.128/25 on their face before they reach our network, so I have to only source-nat our servers via the tunnel to them. Should I just do the static NAT, then let the whole subnet through the acl of valuable traffic as the config below? I don't think I should use twice a nat because I'm not trying to make the destination nat on the firewall. Servers with us will 10.2.255.128/25 and I would like to preserve it through the ASA.

  network of the ServerA object

  host 10.1.0.1

  NAT 10.2.255.1 static (inside, outside)

  network of the object server b

  host 10.1.0.2

  NAT 10.2.255.2 static (inside, outside)

  the object server c network

  host 10.1.0.3

  NAT 10.2.255.3 static (inside, outside)

  the LOCAL_SUBNET object-group network

  object-network 10.2.255.0 255.255.255.128

  the REMOTE_SUBNET object-group network

  object-network 10.2.255.128 255.255.255.128

  VPN_ACL list extended access permitted ip object-group LOCAL_SUBNET-group of objects REMOTE_SUBNET

  Thank you

  Your configuration is correct, but I have a few comments.  Remember that NAT occurs before the delivery of your servers will be translated into 10.2.255.2 and 10.2.255.3 and then sent through the tunnel, so your encryption field is correct.

  Is your internet firewall as well? What your servers out of the internet?  They will be translated to 10.2.255.2 and 10.2.255.3 and who will fail in internet routing is.  If these servers access the internet through the firewall, I would recommend a configuration like this for each of your servers:

  network of the ServerA_NAT object

  Home 10.2.255.1

  NAT static ServerA ServerA_NAT destination (indoor, outdoor) static source REMOTE_SUBNET REMOTE_SUBNET

  This will use destination basic NAT for traffic VPN and NAT everything to a public IP address for the internet traffic.  Of course, if this is not your internet connection firewall can do abstraction.

• Translation NAT PIX problem

  Hello everyone I have the following situation on a running 6.2.2 PIX 520

  I have three interfaces inside, outside, dmz

  on the external interface have an access list to allow icmp from the IPs behind the DMZ interface, I have the following:

  external_access_in list of access permit icmp any 1.1.1.0 255.255.255.0

  NAT (dmz) 0 1.1.1.0 255.255.255.0 0 0

  Access-group external_access_in in interface outside

  1.1.1.0 are routed over the internet, ip addresses of the foregoing allows external hosts don't ping my hosts behind the dmz interface

  I'm doing the same thing try to allow hosts behind the area demilitarized the hosts behind the inside interface to icmp ping:

  dmz_in ip access list allow a whole

  NAT (inside) 0 1.1.5.0 255.255.255.0 0 0

  Access-group dmz_in in dmz interface

  The Interior allows entering by default.

  But I have the newspaper:

  305005: no group of translation not found for icmp src dmz:1.1.1.1 dst domestic: 1.1.5.1 (type 8, code 0)

  In my view, the situation is the same thing as the ping outside the demilitarized zone.

  I have:

  ethernet0 nameif outside security0

  nameif ethernet1 inside the security100

  nameif dmz security50 ethernet2

  Could someone tell me where I'm wrong, and how to allow the demilitarized area welcomes guests inside interface to icmp ping.

  Thanks for your replies.

  When you use "nat 0" with a network after him, it does NOT work as a static/ACL combination that normally, you need to move from a lower to a higher security security interface, as you do here. With "nat 0", traffic not from higher security first interface, THEN traffic can flow from the lower security interface. In your example, the traffic should flow inside the DMZ BEFORE traffic flows from the DMZ to the inside. The reason it works with the DMZ to outside traffic is that traffic probably sank DMZ for outside already, while traffic then flows from the outside to the DMZ.

  NAT 0 is probably something I would keep away from, could the interpretations of the causes like that. IT is IS NOT THE SAME AS STATIC/ACL PAIR., although it is similar.

  I would replace your statements "nat 0" with the following:

  > static (dmz, outside) 1.1.1.0 1.1.1.0 netmask 255.255.255.0

  > static 1.1.5.0 (inside the dmz) 1.1.5.0 netmask 255.255.255.0

  You have still a static, but you translate it into himself, effectively bypassing NAT (even though it still go through the NAT process). Traffic will then be able to move back and forth without worrying. It's easier to read and follow for me too, but that's just my opinion.