In ASA 8.0,I have following queries related to redundant interfaces
a)While configuring redundant interface can the redundant interface again be divided into logical interface like red1.1 , red1.2 ?
b)Is Redundant interface supported in the Multiple context mode
My customer is running an ASA5505 with 8.3 code.
The have a somewhat flaky proxy between their inside LAN and the firewall. I'd like to have a configuration as follows:
LAN > Proxy > VLAN 1 (eth0/2) on ASA
and
LAN > VLAN 1 (eth0/3) on ASA
So that in the event of Proxy failure (let's just say it loses power) the eth0/3 interface will kick in.
This appears to be easily configured according to the documentation:
"The following example creates two redundant interfaces:
hostname(config)# interface redundant 1
hostname(config-if)# member-interface gigabitethernet 0/0
hostname(config-if)# member-interface gigabitethernet 0/1
hostname(config-if)# interface redundant 2
hostname(config-if)# member-interface gigabitethernet 0/2
hostname(config-if)# member-interface gigabitethernet 0/3"
But these commands don't seem to be available on a 5505.
we have two ASA 5510 connected in failover, and a pair of cisco 2960s switch connected in stack. Currently one interface of primary ASA is terminated on switch1 and a interface from standby is connected to switch2 as Inside, and switch1 and switch2 are in stack. for redundancy purpose i want to use multiple interfaces of ASA for inside , so first i thought to use etherchannel , but it has a limitation that , it cannot be terminated on stack switch(as per cisco document [URL]
So my question is :
1. can we use redundant interface feature where 2 physical interfaces combined to a redundant interface (eg interface redundant 1) for inside redundancy purpose.
2. Can these ports from primary/standby ASA terminated on stack switches (2960s), will this work (if the switch with active port goes down, will the other port take over in the redundant interface with the other switch).
We have two multilayer switches and only one ASA 5520. I'd like to connect ASA in the way described on the picture: each redundant interface includes two physical ones, which are connected to different switches
My question is what kind of link it is necessary to have between switches to make this idea work? I'd have subinterfaces like Re1.100, Re2.200 and so on for my traffic.
I understand that correct design approach is to have two redundant firewalls with failover but we cannot purchase the second one yet.
i two 5550 firewall set up for redundance purpose . in failover we define two different ip add one for primary and one for secondary .interface Ethernet0/0 nameif outside security-level 0 ip address xxxx.0.0.0.1 255.255.255.0 standby xxxx.0.0.2!interface Ethernet1/0 nameif inside security-level 100 ip address 10.0.0.12 255.255.255.0 standby 10.0.0.11.default gateway for host will be 10.0.0.12 (primary fw address) however in case of failover , the secondary fw will be up with ip address that was assigned for primary .in this case the secondary ip add 10.0.0.11 is actually nerver used? similarly do i need to have two public ip address for outside (one for primary and one for secondary ) ? or in case if primary fails the secondary comes onlie and take the ip of primary fw . hence i only need to purchase just one ip address.
View 6 Replies View RelatedI am configuring a pix 525,i just found out how to activate the subinterface on it so that's good,the box has a primary unit and secondary unit, both are connected from G0 to redundant switches,if i do a show failover, it says it's using the serial based lan failover, which is fine by me,however, do i need to create a single, regular interface.. or a redundant interface?,i.e. if i create a regular subinterface, will failover still apply to this interface?,or for failover to work, do i need to create a redundant interface (with a redundant id)? i do not seem to have the option to create a subinterface when adding a redundant interface.
View 7 Replies View RelatedI have two ASA 5540s, ver 8.4 configured in Active/Standby failover.I am also using the redundant interface feature for my Inside interface. Gig0/0 is the active primary and Gig0/1 is standby.
I will activate failover monitoring of the Inside interface using the monitor inside command.
My question concerns the failover monitoring of the redundant interface. If the gig0/0 connection were to fail would the Gig0/1 interface become Active, AND simultaneously result in a full device failover?
Or, does Gig0/1 of the Inside interface redundant pair simply become active and not change the Inside interface device failover state? Thus NOT resulting in a device failover.
I am using 6500 with VPN Accelerator on this device. I have a dozen other VPN connections GRE and IPSEC to routers and ASA and other Juniper Firewalls.
They all work perfectly.The error I get is map_db_find_best did not find matching map (Never seen this error be for) [code]I can't put the whole config for security reasons.
Is this this possible to set up two as a redundant pair as you can do with say a pair of 5510s?
View 3 Replies View RelatedI have configured redundant interface on ASA 5510
interface Redundant1
description *** INSIDES NETWORK ***
member-interface Ethernet0/1 (This is a 1000Mbps Port)
member-interface Ethernet0/2 (This one is 100Mbps)
no nameif
no security-level
no ip address
[code]....
Then... i issue following command and its OK!
ASA5510# show interface redundant 1 detail
Interface Redundant1 "", is up, line protocol is up
Hardware is i82546GB rev03, BW 1000 Mbps, DLY 10 usec
Auto-Duplex(Full-duplex), Auto-Speed(1000 Mbps)
Input flow control is unsupported, output flow control is off
[code]...
It's transfer correctly then i no shut and back to normal Primary core switch Gi0/30 Interface again, BUT redundant interface no revert back. I issued this command again BW remain 100Mbps.
ASA5510# show interface redundant 1 detail
Interface Redundant1 "", is up, line protocol is up
Hardware is i82546GB rev03, BW 100 Mbps, DLY 10 usec
Auto-Duplex(Full-duplex), Auto-Speed(100 Mbps)
[ code]....
I did manually shut down and no shut the secondary core switch interface Gi0/30 Its changed correctly to 1000Mbps .
I have two 5505 ASA. I would like to know can I make two 5505 failover redundant with active standby setup?
View 11 Replies View RelatedHaving upgraded to 8.3 from 8.2 I and read much about the differences , it seems that 8.3 deals with NAT in a much more managed method.However I am confused on how one would NAT a network object to multiple interfaces? i.e I know you can specficy a NAT adddress within the network object howeveer this only allows you to specific a single IP address.What if I want to talk accross multiple interfaces how would I specify this?
View 5 Replies View Relatedi have an ASA 5520 running ver 8.4(1). have attached my interface config below and need to do the following, NAT traffic coming on GigabitEthernet0/2.101 to GigabitEthernet0/1, i.e. packets with destination 10.21.110.25 will be forwarded to 10.11.21.25, will a nat (Production,Advocate_MPLS) static ... statement work ?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
interface GigabitEthernet0/1
description Production
nameif Production
security-level 100(code)
I have put 2 physicl interfaces (te0/8 & 9) on the ASA-5585 into a PO and am assigning ips/vlans to the sub-interfaces. I have 2 issues: - Why am I not able to ping the other sub-interface from the ASA itself? (I can ping the 1st one), Secondly, why the IPs are not visible in "sh int ip brief" ?Although I can see them in "sh ip" ..
/actNoFailover(config-if)# int po17.100
/actNoFailover(config-subif)# vlan 100
/actNoFailover(config-subif)# ip add
[Code]....
Do i need to create 2 objects for nating a server to 2 different interfaces?That is an inside server published in two different dmzsAutomatic migration to 8.3 creates 2 objects (one for each nat)Can I do the same with only one object? like this or I need an object for each nat?
object network server
host 192.168.128.10
nat (inside,dmz) static 172.24.1.10
nat (inside,dmzguests) static 10.10.0.10
Can ASA sub-interfaces run separate IP Sec VPN tunnels eg
There are 02 sub-interfaces of 01 physical interface of Cisco ASA5510 [ASA Version 8.2(5)] and I need to run 01 IP Sec VPN tunnel on each of these
We have an ASA 5510 firewall. There are 4 ports on it configured as 2 outside, one inside, and one DMZ. We have two cable modems attached to the outside ports. Our plan is to have the "inside" port directed to one outside port/cable modem, and the DMZ port directed to the other outside port/cable modem.
We have been able to get the "inside-to-outside" setup to work but not the "DMZ-to-outside" setup (at least at the same time).First off, is this possible? If so, what are we likely missing - some way to have a second default route for the DMZ?(My manager is the "Cisco person" here, not me, so I may not have enough info.
I have a pair of brand new 5520s I am in the middle of commission. After carving out all the DMZs etc I needed I realized that I really neede another physical NIC, not just another VLAN off a configured nic. [code]I am running 8.3(2). How can I turn these "Not used" interfaces into useable ones?
View 2 Replies View RelatedI configured ASA 5510 ...
Totally it had 5 ports..
How to provide communication between two different interfaces which had configured as same security level?
How many trunks will support ASA 5510 with base-license?
How to configure trunk to an interface with different VLNs( Router on a stick).
I have a problem on allowing ssh traffic between 2 different INTERNAL interfaces. Both the interfaces have the same security level (100).What I have to do is to allow a ssh command from 172.16.0.2 to 172.17.1.200. The firewall is configured but I am experiencing issues on the NAT.The error I get is as follows:#%ASA-5-305013: Asymmetric NAT rules matched for forward and reverse
View 3 Replies View RelatedWe have ASA FW 5010 in our organization and we have 4 DMZ's under the DMZ interface on ASA and all DMZ's are created on sub interfaces and assigned different VLANS on each DMZ's.
View 7 Replies View RelatedWe have an ASA 5520 which is in multiple context mode. We are trying to pass traffic from the outside interface to the dmz interface. We have a /27 public ip range. We need a small amount of those addresses to be in the DMZ for SIP servers specifically. The rest of the addresses are NAT'd to the inside interface.So i created the outside interface GigabitEthernet0/0 with 1.2.3.192/28 Inside Interface GigabitEthernet0/2 with 192.168.20.0/24 DMZ interface on GigabitEthernet0/2.1 with 1.2.3.208/29 So all i want to do is route traffic that comes in the outside interface and out to the DMZ interface for the 1.2.3.208/29 subnet. I set the gateway address as 1.2.3.214 which is the DMZ interface address on the ASA.
View 20 Replies View RelatedOur ASA 5520 firewall is running 8.0(4) IOS.I have an internal L2L VPN terminating on my firewall (from an internal remote site) on ENG interface.With the default "sysopt connection permit-vpn" command enabled, VPN traffic is allowed to bypass the ENG interface acl.The security level on the ENG interface is set at 50.The security level on the destination interface PRODUCTION is set at 40.Inbound VPN traffic bypasses ENG interface acl and since higher-to-lower security level allows VPN traffic to flow freely from ENG to PRODUCTION, it seems the only place to check/filter VPN traffic is an ACL placed on the PRODCTTION interface and set at INBOUND (outbound VPN traffic).
View 4 Replies View RelatedWe are using Cisco ASA 5580 (8.2) firewall. When i try to ping from inside lan to firewall DMZ interface IP it is not pingable and but from inside users i am able to ping firewall inside interface IP address.
I think we can't ping to other interfaces of ASA by default. But can we allow the single IP address who can ping all the interfaces of firewall?
We are not doing any natting in firewall, for that we used the Load Balancer.
I am using an ASA5550 for a complex secure network that has at least six "outside" networks. Each "outside" network is assigned to a specific port each set at level "0". I also have a DMZ, set to level "50". I am having difficulty with passing traffic from a host in the DMZ to all but one of the "outside" networks. Is there a limit to the number of "outside" interfaces? I will provide a redacted config file as soon as possible.
View 3 Replies View RelatedGot new ASA5550, code 8.2.2 in flash, can't configure "nameif" or "ip address" on the interfaces: [code] These are all the options that I get! Another weird thing I noticed is "<system>" string in "show ver" top line: [code]
View 2 Replies View RelatedI have a Cisco ASA 5520 running 8.2.2 with the VPN Plus license. I am wondering what is the max number of sub-interfaces you can have on a physical interface. I know on the 5505 it was 20 sub-interfaces if you were running the Security Plus license. What is the magic number for the 5520. I have hit 20 sub-interfaces on gi0/1 interface and now I am starting to run into problems with sub-interface #21.
View 1 Replies View RelatedI have a cisco ASA 5520 that i'm configuring.From the actual Firewall (with is a linux server), we have the outside interface eth0 with has a public IP and other sub-interfaces (eth0.1; eth0.2,...) with others publics IPs.I'd like to know how I can configure it in an ASA
View 7 Replies View RelatedI am working on translating configuration from a firewall named Joe box to ASA 5515. On Joe box, it has 5 continuous public IP addresses (xx.xx.xx.73 -77/29), first one as interface IP and others as alias, on the Internet-facing interface. I need to configure ASA 5515 in the same way, however it seems not simple.
- The way to configure sub interfaces on 5515 is by configuring V LAN.
- The interface can hold xx.xx.xx.73/29 without a problem.
- The first sub interface can have IP address xx.xx.xx.74 however with different mask(/16), as it doesn’t allow /29.
- The second sub interface doesn’t allow to enter IP xx.xx.xx.75, saying "Failed to apply IP address to interface GigabitEthernet0.x, as the network overlaps with interface GigabitEthernet0. Two interfaces cannot be in the same sub net."
I know with a ASA5510-SEC-BUN-K9, you can increase eth0/0 and eth0/1 to gigabit with the right IOS. Is the same possible with the CSC version of the ASA?
Exact pn is ASA5510-CSC10-K9. I believe I only have the base license for the ASA, but the security plus for the CSC.
I am trying to determine if this is possible or not. I have tried several configurations and I can only get half of it to work.
LAN (10.1.1.0/24) =====> <===== OUTSIDE (T-1)
ASA5510
DMZ (10.1.10.0/29) ====> <===== BACKUP (DSL LINE)
The Cisco ASA5510 currently is configured with the following interfaces: inside, outside backup, and dmz.The backup interface routes to the internet via a DSL modem, it normally is not active.The outside interface routes to the internet via a T-1 line.The inside interface is our local LAN and the DMZ has our email server on it.I am wondering if there is a way to configure the ASA5510 so all internet traffic from the inside LAN goes only through the DSL modem and all the DMZ traffic only goes through the T-1 line. No inside traffic (inbound or outbound) should go through the T-1. No DMZ traffic (inbound or outbound) should go through the DSL line.
I can get the LAN to use the DSL line with no problem, but the DMZ to T-1 side causes reverse-path errors.I am not looking for redundancy or failover protection.
I have two virtual interfaces on my ASA 5520:
GigabitEthernet0/1.338 172.30.0.81/28
GigabitEthernet0/1.345 172.30.0.129/28
I have the security levels for both set to 50 and in the ASDM I have checked off "Enable traffic between two or more interfaces which are configured with same security levels"
But now the need has arisen that we allow each subnet to be routable to each other for SMTP traffic, how can I accomplish this?
I'm having a weird issue with an ASA 5520 (Ver. 8.2) of a customer. The scenario is as follows:
There is a sub net (on a sub interface) "Guest" which basically is allowed unlimited access to the internet. Traffic is source Na Ted through the ASA to the outside interface. This works fine.
There is on the "inside" interface a server which can be accessed from the outside via a public IP address. On the ASA this is implemented as a static NAT entry. This also works fine.
Now the customer wants to access the server on the inside from a client of the "Guest" interface using the public (Na Ted) IP address. Reason for this is, they have an application with hard programmed IP address inside and want to run some life tests. However, this kind of traffic seems not to be passing through the ASA.
What I have tried so far:
- examined, if a hairpin scenario could be applied here, but it seems not, as I have traffic traveling between interfaces not out and in to the same interface.
- enabled the option "enable traffic between two or more interfaces which are configured with same security levels" and also "enable traffic between two or more hosts connected to the same interface"
- when I use the real addresses of the host, it works, so it shouldn't be an issue with the firewall rules
So any reason why I cannot use the public NAT address from any of the other interfaces?