Cisco Firewall :: ASA 5510 - Multiple V LAN's And ACLs
Feb 27, 2013
I'm having a bit of trouble determining the best way to do this... I have 12 V LAN's set up (sub interfaces on a redundant group of two NICs) on my ASA 5510. On several of these, I want them to be able to access the internet but not access other V LAN's.
By default, they have a rule like "any to any less secure", and since the outside interface has a lower security level, this works great. But if I create an ACL on the interface, this rule disappears. I can restore internet access by adding an "any to any" or "(this interface's sub net) to any" rule, but this seems to imply that it allows access to any v LAN. Do I have to create a set of "deny" rules for each V LAN, on each V LAN, followed by an any-any rule to allow internet access, or is there a cleaner approach?
I have the need to run a few autonomous APs (1262) for some sites on satellite links. At a bare minimum I need to run two WLANs. One is wide open, and the other with an ACL that heavily restricts access. Is there any way to tie two WLANs to a single VLAN, while applying an ACL to just one WLAN?
I need to create a firewalled segment that not only separates hosts from general population, but also from each other. The solitary confinement of firewalled segments.I know that I could create a bunch of sub-interfaces, one for each host or group that needs to be isolated, but I'd really rather not have to do that if possible. 1) It could become a management nightmare between ACLs and sub-interfaces and 2) it's a waste of IP addresses.s there any way that I can create a bunch of separate VLANs behind the firewall and have them all terminate at the firewall, using a single firewall IP address for the gateway?
I have an ASA5510 that is connected to outside for WAN, inside for LAN (10.22.254.0/24), and a iSCSI switch plugged into Ethernet 0/3 (10.22.244.0/24). I can ping the Eth0/3 interface (10.22.244.1) but I can't ping across that interface from WAN or LAN side.
START CONFIGURATION ASA Version 9.1(1) ! hostname ASA5510
i've two cisco asa5510 with 4 FastEthernet interfaces each.They are connected as below:
[code]...
to three different ISP each of them! The 4rth interface of each of them, is connected to internal LAN network. Both Firewalls, offers VPN Services to ISP connections on Fa0/0
How can i achieve high availability for this scneario?is this possible to implement some HighAvailability and to offer the actual services to each of them, in case that the other firewall fail?What about using subintefaces? can i connect bothe ISP and Customers links on one or each of them, in case that firewall01 fails, all the services to be online on firewall02?
I'm currently replacing my ASA 5505 with a 5510. I have a range of public IP addresses, one has been assigned to the outside interface by the setup wizard (e.g. 123.123.123.124 ) and another I would like to NAT to an internal server (e.g 192.168.0.3 > 123.123.123.125). On my asa 5505 this seemed fairly straigh forward, i.e. create an incoming access rule that allowed SMTP to 123.123.123.125 and then create a static nat to translate 192.168.0.3 to 123.123.123.125. Since I've tried to do the same on the 5510 traffic is not passing through so I'm assuming that the use of additional public IP addresses is not handled in the same way as the 5505? I also see that by default on the 5505, 2 VLANs are created, one for the inside and one for the outside, where as this is not the case on the 5510. Is the problem that VLANs or sub-interfaces need to be created first? I'm doing the config via ASDM.
Everything else seems to OK i.e. access to ASDM via 123.123.123.124, outbound PAT and the site-to-site VPN.
I have a few sites all running Cisco ASA 5510s. They all share the same asa (8.4(4)1) and asdm (6.4.9) version, but their configs differ significantly. I have a cold spare sitting in my office in the event we have a physical failure. Is there a quick and simple way I can load up multiple configs and then boot up the cold spare to then run the config from Site_A or Site_B? Just looking for a quick solution rather than doing a full restore should something fail spectacularly. Nice to say upon bootup, using confreg perhaps, to boot Site_A config rather than Site_C.
I am trying to set up my ASA5510 the fail over of ISP when it can't ping three different IP. I create three different tracking to three different IP using sla monitor & track rtr. But when I do
the last route will replace the previous two and only the last route command takes effect.Is there anyway I can set up the fail over to ISP2 only when it can't ping three different IP from ISP1?
I am working on replacing our Checkpoint Firewalls with ASA's, and am running into the following NAT problem. On some of our Checkpoints, there are external NAT's that are mapped to multiple internal hosts based on ports.Is there any way to translate that to the ASA? I'm not sure the ASA will let you have multiple internal hosts mapped to one external IP using static NATs. The main issue, is these are alarm panels that receive data from external hosts (the traffic is initiated externally on the Internet) so I can't use dynamic PAT with this.
I'm almost afraid to post since my stuff is so OLD! I have a 350 Series PCI Wireless LAN Adapter in my old WinXP, not wireless-ready Compaq.I live off the grid, no landlines and have been using a Franklin CDU680 USB air card to connect to the Internet. The air card doesn't like my Compaq - occasionally crashes it. I thought to put the air card in a router to solve the problem and communicate with the router using the Cisco 350. Bought a Cradle Point router from my ISP and plugged in the Franklin. Then spent the next 5 days trying to get the Cisco 350 to associate with the router.I now have a profile with the router's SSID in it that according to the ACU's status report is associated with that SSID. Problem is that there is no Internet connection.
Currently a customer has all theLAN devices using a router as the Default Gateway. The router also do the Dynamic NAT to the internet access and has NAT/PAT rules to publish some services like HTTP and FTP. As I know the router will permit all the incoming traffic in all its interfaces without restrictions at less there is an ACLs that restrict the incoming traffic on an specific interface.Now the customer has bought a brand new ASA and wants to use it as the default gateway for the entiery LAN. This means, the ASA will have the internet connection and will be the responsible for the NAT/PAT process.
I have configured the NAT/PAT rules already following the current router configuration, but I need to know if I have to configure ACLs allowing the incoming traffic on th Outside interface for the services I NATed.
In the near future I plan on updating all of my firewalls to 8.4, currently we're on a mix of 8.0 and 8.2. I've heard that if your equipment is on 8.2 there's an auto-conversion feature when upgrading to 8.3. However, I do not want to rely on that and am trying my hand at re-writing the NAT and ACLs myself. Attached is my pre 8.3 ASA 5510 config (santized) and a document that shows the particular sections pre 8.3 and what I think they should be after the upgrade.
VLAN 20 and VLAN 30 i configured. VLAN 20 interface IP : 192.168.20.1/24 VLAN 30 interface IP : 192.168.30.1/24. Inter-vlan communication is happening fine.
For testing for purpose i configured extended ACLs. Here is my requirement: I want to stop communication from VLAN 30 to VLAN 20 but not vice-versa.
Here i configured like this:
access-list 111 deny ip 192.168.20.0 0.0.0.255 192.168.30.0 0.0.0.255 access-list 111 permit ip any any applied ACL in VLAN 30 interface 'in' direction. ip access-group 111 in
In this scenario, communication is stopping in both directions. If i ping from one of the IP VLAN 20 to one of the ip of VLAN 30, i was gettng Requested time out. And if i ping from one of the IP VLAN 20 to VLAN 30 interface IP, i was able get pinging.
From VLAN 30 to VLAN 20, i was getting destination host unreachable from VLAN 30 ip( Its fine as its my requirement). So, solution needed to communicate from VLAN 20 to VLAN 30.
It is my understanding that ACLs can only be bound to logical interfaces using the access-group command. However, is it possible to somehow apply ACLs simply based on the ASA's local Ethernet interface? For instance, consider the following:
Device A with IP 192.168.1.1/24 is connected to Ethernet0/0 on the ASA. Device B with IP 192.168.1.2/24 is connected to Ethernet0/1 on the ASA.
Since both devices are in the same subnet and presumably the same VLAN, is it possible to manipulate the traffic to and from physical Ethernet interfaces using ACLs in this manner?
My predicament is fairly simple:
Internet --- ASA --- ROUTER | DMZ
In addition to NAT, VPN, and various other tricks, my ASA is also routing traffic from my internal LAN and the Internet to servers in the DMZ configured on the ASA. Due to a combination of Internet and DMZ traffic, my relatively slow ASA is struggling to route and thus becoming a bottleneck. My router is comparatively modest in terms of functionality when compared to the ASA but it is fast. My ideal solution would be to somehow harness the ASA's filtering capabilities for my DMZ but use the router to get traffic to and from my internal LAN into the DMZ without using the ASA to route it.
Additionally, it is worth noting that my DMZ is fairly restrictive so using protected or isolated ports would not quite work for me.
A CISCO 3750-X stack with several VLANs and many ACLs applied to the virtual interfaces. Intervlan routing is on. Connected to this stack are VMware hosts and with about 500 VMs.We started using the ACLs to allow connectivity between VLANs to specific hosts and it has grown to thousands of lines. I personally do not think this is good for the switch and believe the switch was not intended to be used for that security feature.
- Does it make it sense to add an "internal firewall" between the CORE ROUTER AND THE 3750-X SWITCH STACK ?
- Do you recommend any other way?
- Any recommended CISCO resource/white paper to read about best practice
I want to restrict outgoing traffic. Currently the deafault any, any IP allows all traffic from the inside to the outside.
So I created some rules to only allow HTTP and HTTPS. First I configured a rule to allow all DNS (TCP 53) traffic out. Then I added a rules to allow HTTP (TCP 80) and secure HTTP (TCP 443) out.
When I apply and try to surf out to the internet from a box on the inside network I cannot. Remove the rules which returns the default any, any IP and traffic flows.
Packet tracer shows that the traffic should flow. And I have had minor traffic flowing but slow.
how to only allow web surfing from the inside to outside using the ASDM (5.1) to configure? I realize this is probably a very simple thing, but I only configure the ASA about once every year!
I have found this in documentation (the same statement for version 8.3 and 8.4):
" Access Control Implicit Deny #All access lists (except Extended access lists) have an implicit deny statement at the end, so unless you explicitly permit traffic to pass, it will be denied. For example, if you want to allow all users to access a network through the ASA except for one or more particular addresses, then you need to deny those particular addresses and then permit all others. "
Does it mean that now all ACLs shoud have created manualy deny ip any any rule at the end ? I have migrated one ASA to version 8.3 (no host connected and I can't test it) but after migration I don't see this rule at the end of all ACLs. Does it mean that all traffic will go throu ACLs on all interfaces ? I didn't find any information about this change in documents describing new software features [URL]
I have a ASA 5510 at our corporate HQ that has one site to site VPN. I need to add 6 additional site to site VPN's to this ASA for our remote branches. How can I add them without affecting the existing site to site VPN? The 6 site to site VPN's will all have the same settings however these settings are different from the existing site to site that I already have set up. How can I set it up so the 6 additional VPN's use their own crypto map and all use the same settings?
I have an ASA 5505, firmware 7.2 (4). Configured ACLs, NAT, it's all working, but after a while it seems that running crashes, no longer makes the directions of NATs, the logs until they stop working. To resolve, I have to restart the ASA, and everything will work again.
I have a client that is using an ASA5510 and would like to make some changes ,current config ,int 0/0 - external connection (T1) with multiple VPN site to site tunnels and VPN client tunnels ,int 0/1 Internal (10 network),Proposed config , add cable internet to int 0/3 , route default internet traffic to cable internet , leave VPN tunnels on T1 ,failover internet in the event of cable internet outage(using tracking) ,Would one or both of these options work? if so what is the better way to do it?
I am trying to enable a second WAN interface on our ASA.the end goal is to move all internet traffic to the new connection, but first i want to test it working.I have setup my computer as an object in the ASDM and the interface is configured correctly (same settings on a different router and that was working)I setup a route with a lower metric ( 1 lower than the default route which routes everything through current main internet interface) to route traffic from my computer out through the new interface but i am still connected on the old interface.I duplicated some of th NAT rules (but i would have thought if these werent working then i would have no internet connection anyway)
Currently I have an asa 5510 set up with one block of outside IP addresses. Everything is working fine in regards to my initial setup. However we needed to purchase additional IPs from our provider and ended up being a whole complete different block. Where I am getting stuck is getting the new IPs to NAT to inside addresses.
im lookin to establish a a multiple L2L ips tunnels ( one tunnel for each subnet) from my cisco asa 5510 to the same destination. should the cisco asa capable of this ?
I would like to create two site-to-site VPNs, one for data and one for VoIP, between the same sites. One end is an ASA 5510 and the other is a third party firewall. Is this possible if I use different sets of IP addresses for each tunnel?
I use a Cisco ASA 5510 with the AnyConnect VPN for remote workers. Now we want to give access to a select group of consultants who only need access to one sever and block everything else.
I was thinking this could be done by creating a separate AnyConnect Connection Profile on the ASA. From that new connection will come a new GroupPolicy with a ACL to only allow access to the one system. That GroupPolicy will point to the Radius Server looking for an account in a specific MemberOf group.
My question is - Could you explain how the ASA knows what Connection Profile to use when a user tries to authenticate? Does it automatically hunt down each Connection Profile until there is a username match via RADIUS in the Connect Profile?
Due to special circumstances we have 2 ISP links on an ASA5510. I am trying to terminate some L2L VPN tunnels on one link and others on the second ISP Link, eg below:
LOCAL FIREWALL crypto map outside-map_isp1 20 match address VPN_ACL_Acrypto map outside-map_isp1 20 set peer 1.1.1.1crypto map outside-map_isp1 20 set transform-set TS-Generic crypto map outside-map_isp2 30 match address VPN_ACL_Bcrypto map outside-map_isp2 30 set peer 3.3.3.3crypto map outside-map_isp2 30 set transform-set TS-Generic crypto map outside-map-isp1 interface ISP_1crypto map outside-map-isp2 interface ISP_2 crypto isakmp enable ISP_1crypto isakmp enable ISP_2 route ISP_1 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 1.1.1.254route ISP_2 3.3.3.3 255.255.255.255 2.2.2.254
Establising the VPN tunnels in either direction when using ISP_1 works fine establishing in either direction from remote access users and multiple L2L tunnels (only showing one for example).
On ISP_2 1. Peer 3.3.3.3 device establishes a VPN tunnel, but the return traffic does NOT get back to devices on 3.3.3.3 tunnel. 2. The local firewall does NOT establish a VPN tunnel going to 3.3.3.3 It would seem to indicate that the problems lies with this multihomed firewall not directing the traffic correctly to either return down and establised VPN tunnel (point1) or to intiate a tunnel if none exists (point 2).
Reconfiguring the VPN tunnel peer for 3.3.3.3 to be on ISP_1 of the local firewall, all springs into life! There are sufficient license etc...
We have plans for multiple ISPs and need to pick the correct device/architecture for that. single site: 3 ethernet hand offs (1 From ATT Fiber/10Mb pipe via their managed router, another one from ATT via Copper T1 via a separate circuit & managed router and the 3rd/last from Cable Modem/Comcast)
1.WAN hand off from another ISP from I will use ASA 5510 (already have) to use all the above 4 as inputs and then use the internal interface of the ASA 5510 as the default gateway for all the employees to browse the internet etc. so that1. If one one or more of the ISP lines die, we continue to operate (albeit lower bandwidth)
2. Also, we take advantage of the added bandwidth (even though it may not be the arithmetic sum of all the above).
I'd like to set up a downloadable ACL from my ACS 5.2 server to be applied for users authenticating for just one of my SSIDs / WLANs.
I intend to use this primarily for mobile devices to allow them to go to any of my physical locations, connect to the same WLAN regardless of location and then get the same downloaded ACLs (filtered based off of destination port and address) applied in each case.
I'm screwing around with HSRP running between two L3 interfaces of routers. I placed an inbound and outbound ACL on the same interface on both of these routers specifying to "permit ip any host 224.0.0.2" Why am I only seeing counters ticking for the inbound ACL of both of these routers? Is it an order of operations thing?
