Cisco Firewall :: ASA5510 Not Routing Traffic To Internet
Sep 2, 2012
I have just set up a Cisco ASA 5510. It basically only contains the settings provided in the startup wizard. It however does not let through traffic from the internal interface to wan 2 (wan 1 is not connected yet but traffic should also be able to go there).
My device has 3 interfaces configured: inside, outside, DMZ. Right now I can access the DMZ from the Internet and I can access the DMZ from the LAN using an exempt nat statement. I am having a few issues setting up DMZ > LAN access however. The servers running on the DMZ need to send information to my LAN such as syslog traffic for example. Will DMZ traffic be NATed or should this somehow be excluded? Bascially all LAN devices should get to the DMZ devices by their actual IP and vice versa. Are there any special statements I need to add to the ASA such as nat or ACLs to make this work? My LAN is 10.10.6.0/24 and DMZ is 192.168.254.0/24.
I have ASA5510. It's include security plus license.I want to traffic shape to 200Mbps. But , I checked a CCO.CCO said that a shaping limit is 154400000. "Enables traffic shaping, where the average rate argument sets the average rate of traffic in bits per second over a given fixed time period, between 64000 and 154400000. "It's mean shaping limit 154400000 ?Can I shape to 200Mbps ?
I would like to connect a second ISP link to our ASA 5510 to solely serve http traffic from our organization's employees (ie. web surfing). We currently have all employee traffic and two site-to-site VPN tunnels connecting to the internet from this firewall. I want to keep the tunnels as currently configured on the existing connection and split out http/https traffic from our staff onto a less costly link.
I have an ASA5510 with 8.3 and a Cisco PIX525 (retiring). The ASA was for VPN traffic only while the PIX was for all other Internet traffic. I'm trying to move all the traffic to the ASA5510 so I used the PIX to ASA migration tool. I migrated the PIX rules over to the ASA5510, however we can't receive email and there is no external access to our internal websites. But the VPN connections remain intact and internal users can get out to the internet.
When I run Packet Tracer on my outside (incoming rules) the packets are dropped at the inside interface. What am I missing?
I ' m not able to configure the asa 5510 to allow the multicast traffic to pass through ASA.The multicast traffic have to pass from inside interface to outside interface.Can I configure the multicast traffic to pass through asa with a static nat ?
I've been trying to figure this one out for quite a while. I currently have 2 inside interfaces (data, phone) and I am moving to 3 inside interfaces (servers, workstations, phones). I have not been able to get any traffic between the interfaces. With the current setup it was not a major problem. With the new setup it will be a major problem.
Up until recently one of my sites was able to get to a postilion subnet. Then we started receiving "host unreachable" e-mails. Posting told us SMTP traffic was not getting let in. I've compared the current config to a config that was saved before the issue popped up and found really no noticeable difference.
I tried a packet tracer trace with no luck: SiteB- Firewall# packet-tracer input outside tcp 220.127.116.11 12345 18.104.22.168 25.
Phase: 1 Type: FLOW-LOOKUP Subtype: Result: ALLOW Config: Additional Information: Found no matching flow, creating a new flow [code]...
Result: input-interface: outside input-status: up input-line-status: up output-interface: outside output-status: up output-line-status: up Action: drop Drop-reason: (acl-drop) Flow is denied by configured rule
Attached is a sanitized config. I'm not entirely convinced it's a firewall issue, but I need to some successful testing to prove otherwise.
I am using ASA5510 and i want to know if it is possible to redirect http traffic to an internal proxy software. I explain : PC from the LAN use a internal proxy in their IE browser but some other PC doesn't use it.They are directy connected to the Internet using the Public IP from the WAN interface ( via NAT). Can we redirected this HTTP Traffic from the WAN interface to the Proxy in the LAN ?
Http Traffic will be routed like that : PC -> WAN interface -> Proxy -> WAN interface -> Internet In fact,can we create a rule saying : All http traffic which doesn"t come from the IP Proxy must be redirected toward proxy.
I am having an issue when implementing an additional internet connection on our ASA 5510. The new connection is "TWCOutside". I was my understanding that static NAT would force our externally hosted servers (Email, PPTP VPN, and FTP) to continue to utilize the "ATTOutside" connection. Our remote site-to-site VPN traffic has two static routes configured to force it to continue to use the ATTOutside connection.When I switch the metric on the 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 22.214.171.124 route to 1, and change out default dynamic xlate to use "TWCOutside", it "mostly" works as expected. Email, the PPTP VPN server, and our remote site-to-site VPN server continue to use the ATTOutside connection as designed. Our end users begin using the new connection for thier internet browsing.
However, our FTP server, in the DMZ, completley loses outside access. It cannot ping to 126.96.36.199, or resolve DNS queries. The is a static NAT statement for this server, as it is using one of our dedicated public IP addresses. I need it to continue to do so for the next few weeks.Effectivley, we just want to give our end users internet browsing on the new TWC link, but leave everything else on the old ATT link for the time being. The only problem I am having is the DMZ connection. I am currently "rolled back", so no one is using the new connection until I figure this out. I can easily switch the metric and dynamic PAT back to using the TWC connection, but I need to have some things to try with the DMZ before doing so. [code]
WE have a DMZ on ASA5510 8.4, it can access anything internal interface but cannot get out to internet or outside interface. I try to ping from a host in the DMZ to 188.8.131.52 and get this in the log 6Apr 25 201208:24:431100038.8.8.80184.108.40.2061Routing failed to locate next hop for ICMP from outside:220.127.116.11/0 to inside:18.104.22.168/1. [code]
I'am using ASA5510 and I configured a VPN IPSEC. When I connect to the vpn with a windows client ( using windows vista) , I have access to the network ressources but when i want to go on the Internet it doesn't work. (particulary with Internet explorer, it works with Firefox!) Furthermore,On other windows client I haven't this problem.
There is a PIX 506E and ASA5510, with different connection to service provider. Problem is Apple remote users can't access resources protected by the PIX506E. Apple users can access resources protected by ASA5510. Physically the PIX and ASA are in close proximity with no physical connections. Is it possible for Apple users to authenticate with the ASA and the traffic get routed to and get authenticated by the PIX, inorder to access resources?Due to bandwidth restrictions, a DMZ on the ASA will not be created at this time inorder to consolodate firewalls. Currently 2 x T1 is the connection between ASA and ISP; 1 T1 connects PIX to ISP.
I wanted an ASA to do hairpin routing. Here is the situation. A client was running there internet through a partner's WAN. They do not have a layer3 switch/router, and the defautl gateway on there network was actually the the partner's equip. They recently purchased there own internet circuit and an ASA5510. I initially tried putting in the nat exception and permit same security interface and static route on the ASA so that traffic bound for the extranet segment would be routed back out the inside interface toward the gateway to the partner's WAN. Pings worked right away, however no applications would work: no web traffic, application traffic, anything. My only guess is that the ASA does not like this in relation to stateful traffic flow, and the fact that since the partner's gateway is on the same subnet, you end up with asymentric routing.
I was asked to enable netflow in an ASA Firewall for Orion/Solarwinds server monitoration. Firewall is a 5550, with 4G RAM, and no extra modules but SSM-4GE. This firewall has 5 DMZ segments and ans specific segment for internet traffic.There are segments as unique subinterfaces in physical interfaces. Other segments as individual subinterfaces in the same physical interface (but individual VLANs)Usually firewall CPU flows between 30% to 40%. Rarely to 50%.
1 - How dangerous or risky could be implement netflow in this firewall?...This firewall is very critical for the customer. My concern is regrading CPU, traffic generated, memory, etc
2 - In a month, firewall will be migrated from 8.2 software version to 8.4 software version. Is there any incompatibility in some commands?...Would be recommended to perform netflow configuration after software upgrade?
3 - How could it be implemented for Orion monitoring, regarding each individual sub-interface (and so, each VLAN assigned)?I there any recommendation regarding configuration, best practices?
I have two interfaces connected to two different subnet - interface 0/1 = 10.100.1.0/24 , interface0/2 = 10.100.113.0/24 as they are direct connected to the ASA i assume i dont need to add an static route but when i try to ping from one interface to the other (ping inside 10.100.113.1) i get "Routing failed to locate next hop". [code]
I have a ASA5510 with 2 internal interfaces (inside1 and inside2 same security level) configured with OSPF for dynamic routing with 2 routers to corporate subnets. I have a server in a private subnet that needs to be accessed from Internet. So static pat is used in ASA with the command
As OSPF is in use, the subnet 192.168.1.0/24 may be reachable from interface inside2. When I tried to configure the static command for inside2,
static (inside2, outside) tcp interface www 192.168.1.1 www netmask 255.255.255.255.the error message came out "WARNING: mapped-address conflict with existing static...". Is this just a warning, or this is not possible in ASA.
I have ezVPN Clients connected to the ASA5510. Those Clients are assigned an IP from 192.168.236.0/24 Pool.
I have a Router of a contractor connected to a dedicated ASA Interface called IBIZA with IP Net 10.100.10.0/24 and the Router itself with the IP 10.100.10.1. Behind that Router is another private Network which I need to reach from the ezVPN Clients.
The Connection from the ezVPN Clients to the "LAN" Interface/Network on the ASA works fine, but I cannot reach either the Contractor Router (10.100.10.1) nor the Network behind that.
From the LAN Network (on the LAN Interface) I can reach both the Contractor Router and the Network behind.
When I use the Packet Tracer Tool from the ASDM it tells me that the Traffic goes through but ends on the LAN Interface. But it should end on the IBIZA Interface or am I wrong here ?
What do I need to tell the ASA to route the Traffic from the ezVPN Client to the Contractor Router and back ? I have set up the ezVPN Connection as full-tunnel so all Traffic goes through the VPN Tunnel. That shouldn´t be the Problem.
I try to setup a ASA5510, but without success. Actually, I have Cisco1800(192.168.96.1/21) from my ISP connected to a Cisco 3825 (via port with IP 192.168.96.2) all is working good. Now I want to insert a asa firewall between ISP router and 3825.
For that, I tried a more simple config : ISProuter (192.168.96.1/21) ---- ASA outside port(192.168.96.2/255.255.255.248) ASA INSIDE port (192.168.100.1/255.255.255.0) --- a pc with IP 192.168.100.2, netsmask 255.255.255.0, gateway 192.168.100.1 From my ASA, I can ping 192.168.96.1. but a "ping INSIDE 192.168.96.1" fail from py pc, can ping 192.168.100.1, but not 192.168.96.1 Here, my ASA config :
ASA Version 7.0(8)host name cisco asa enable password 8Ry2YjIyt7RRXU24 encrypted password 2KFQnbNIdI.2KYOU encrypted names dns-guard ! interface Ethernet0/0 shutdown no nameif no security-level no ip address [code]....
I have an ASA5510 running version 8.2(5) I am having an issue with routing/natting from an internal network to the outside interface IP on port 443 which has a nat back in to another internal address. i works externally in from a public address. i also see log messages to do with IP Spoofing
I have an ASA5510 from which I am using 3 interfaces.
-One interface have the main internet connection router
-One interface is attache to a switch 3750 and has multiple virtual interface configured on it
-One interface has another internet connection router.
What I am trying to do is to have only one of the Vlan using the second internet connection and not the first one.
My idea was to just have a static route who says that on interface VLAN_B (for the special VLAN), all traffic goes to 2nd internet router interface. But it does not route. All I have is a default route configured : on interface Internet1 0.0.0.0/0 goes to 1st internet router interface.
Although this is not a common issue, we have experienced occasions where our internet utilization has been maxed out (slowing everyone else down). Utilizing some features in the ASA, such as Top Usage Stats, along with PRTG monitoring, have always tracked the culprit down to being a single user -- be it someone downloading movies to a portable device, or downloading ISO's. (And for some strange reason it seems to always be a wireless user.) We are using an ASA 5510 for our firewall, and I was wondering if its possible to prevent a single client from consuming a disproportionally large percentage of our internet bandwidth? If the ASA 5510 doesn't have the ability to do this on it's own, are there any recommendations for add-on solutions?
Changes needed to make to the DHCP Server (AUSPDC) in order to get things working with the new switches.
1) Configure 3 new DHCP scopes on your DHCP server.
a) scope for 10.2.201.x/24 to serve LAN employees and give them a gateway address of 10.2.201.254.
b) a scope for 10.2.202.x/24 to serve WLAN employees and give them a gateway address of 10.2.202.254.
c) a scope for 10.2.203.x/24 to serve WLAN Guests and give them a gateway address of 10.2.203.254.
I just upgraded and decided to go with the VLAN configuration. None of my VLANS can get out to the internet or each other due to I think My ignorance in configuring the firewall.The PC's are getting proper IP address but they cannot get out or to the other VLANs. I tried to duplicate what is working for VLAN1 but it is not working.
I currently have a site to site VPN running connecting a branch office and the Main office using a ASA5510 and ASA 5505. currently PC's at the branch can access the network in the main office using interface 0/1, but we have added another ip range using interface 0/2 and I can't seem to route the traffic to both interfaces. I currently have 0/1 as inside 192.168.10.1 which works, and have added 0/2 as Inside2 192.168.20.1. I know I am forgetting something, any commands to route incoming VPN traffic so PC's at the branch office can connect to both IP ranges?
We've created an ipsec VPN tunnel between our ASA5510 (8.3) and a Pix firewall (not sure of the specific version, etc).
The tunnel works fine, except for timing at times (traffic only goes through a few times a day), and a wierd problem with all traffic being allowed even though I'm only allowing specific ports (SFTP, SQL Server 1433) from a network at the client site to a specific server in our Data center.
I was surprised that I could RDP into the server, as well as telnet any other port exposed on this server from the client site. Now as I write this i realize that I did not check whether any of our other data center servers can be reached via the tunnel.....
Not having set up many VPN tunnels before using ASA (only Checkpoint - Checkpoint before this), I'm wondering whether i need to include another rule in the VPN tunnel cryptomap to deny all other traffic from their network to our network, or whether there's a global config I need to add a rule to.
I am moderately conversant in the command line, but because of my lack of Cisco VPN tunnel experience I did use the ASDM site-to-site VPN tunnel wizard to set the tunnel up. Not sure if there were any defaults i would have to override using that method.
We have many VPN tunnels back to our corporate office. All of these tunnels are very slow (same with our client VPN's). Our main firewall device at the corporate office is an ASA5510. We have a 100 Mb/sec Metro Ethernet internet connection here. We do not allow split-tunneling.
Our remote sites vary. We have DSL connections, cable internet connections, and other types of broadband that vary in speeds from 5 to 100 Mb/sec (up and down). The remote sites mostly have PIX 501's, but we have an ASA 5505 in one of the locations.
To take an example. On one of our remote sites that has a 100 Mb/sec connection, if I ping device to device, I'm getting ping times of about 50ms. And I'm pinging back through another 100 Mb/sec connection. If I get on a computer down there and run a speed test, I'm showing down speeds of about 1.5 Mb/sec... nowhere near 100. Some of that could be due to the lack of split tunneling, but I also suspect this could be an MTU issue.
Right now, all my MTU's are just set to the default 1500. Perhaps this is too high. I used this site to check my max: [URL]
I did a few tests from behind several of my firewalls. I pinged from a machine on one side of the tunnel to the firewall on the other end. I'm assuming the max MTU I come up with is the max MTU for the firewall I'm behind while pinging, right? The max amounts I came up with for some of my devices were as follows: Corporate ASA 5510 > 1272 (if you add the 28 byte packet header that would make it 1300) Remote PIX 501 > 1416 (if you add the 28 byte packet header that would make it 1444) Remote ASA 5505 > 1418 (if you add the 28 byte packet header that would make it 1446)
So, do I just need to set my MTU values to the appropriate amounts? I have tried changing the value, but I don't see any change in speed/performance. But I also don't know if I need to reboot the firewalls after changing the MTU. I know with Catalyst switches, you have to reload. But I didn't see any messages about needing to reboot on the ASA's/PIX's.