I currently have WCCP redirection setup on my ASA 5520 to redirect to an ironport on ip address 10.11.1.10. The ASA inside ip is 10.11.1.1 and the ironport is setup for transparent redirection to that IP. This all works well and the Service Identifier i'm using for WCCP is 95.I am now creating another WCCP group because on my ironport I have 4 interfaces so I wanted to use them for our admin network. So I created an ACL on the ASA for our admin traffic and I want to redirect that using Service Identifier 94 to the ip on the ironport of 10.11.1.22. But I can't get traffic to redirect.
I have a 5520 ASA using wccp redirection to our IronPorts on the inside and everything works great for inside users. What I'm trying to do is get VPN users off split tunneling and to filter their traffic through the IronPorts as well but I can't figure out how. When they connect they seem to bypass the Ironport completely.
I have the following topology, WCCP is configurated on ASA, inside interface, lan users and websense machine are located on the same VLAN of my catalyst 3750G?I want to filter traffic on port 80 (www) to the users on the LAN side debug on the ASA show me that comunication between that device and Websense is OK, there is Here_I_Am and I_See_You packets
WCCP-PKT:D00: Sending I_See_You packet to WEBSENSE_PROXY w/ rcv_id 0000015B WCCP-PKT:D00: Received valid Here_I_Am packet from WEBSENSE_PROXY w/rcv_id 0000015B WCCP-PKT:D00: Sending I_See_You packet to WEBSENSE_PROXY w/ rcv_id 0000015C WCCP-PKT:D00: Received valid Here_I_Am packet from WEBSENSE_PROXY w/rcv_id 0000015C WCCP-PKT:D00: Sending I_See_You packet to WEBSENSE_PROXY w/ rcv_id 0000015D
From show WCCP i saw that WCCP engine and ASA were detected
FW# sh wccp Global WCCP information: Router information: Router Identifier: 200.X.X.X Protocol Version: 2.0
I have a ASA5585 running 8.4 that is redirecting Internet http to a websense server via GRE.The integration is working fine, except when a user PC sends a large packet (~1500 bytes).With WCCP/GRE headers, the user packet is too large to be transmitted to websense, so the ASA fragments the packet in two and transmits both to websense.
A sniffer trace confirms that both fragments reach the websense server, but the TCP packet is never acknowledged.User-side TCP retransmits the large packet three times over 15 seconds, and eventually retransmits fine with smaller packets. The 15 second delay is of course not acceptable.Users and Websense server are both on the Inside interface.
We are considering imposing browser proxy to websense (which works fine), but would prefer not, considering the increasing diversity of devices.
I am using cisco 5520 for my RAS & site - site VPN's. backbone 6509 --> CISCO 5520--> ISP router with 3 ethenet interfaces.From cisco 5520 there r 2 connections to router, one for sit-site vpn outside interface and the other for RAS outside. I want to configure url redirection on 5520 so that when someone from outside access public IP it should forward it to the server in LAN. I want to use the interface hosting RAS for this.
if a Cisco router or switch can handle wccp redirection enabled for both waas and some other web content filtering appliance using a different service group?
seems like the priority value would come into play determining which service group gets handled first?
we currently do WCCP for WaaS on our 3945s.
I am going to advocate to my customer that we separate this out for CPU load issues, config complexity issues, IOS issues, etc... but the question is going to come up - "can we do WCCP for different applications on our Catalyst 3750 core switch, or our 3945 WAN routers?"
I have a Cisco 7206VXR running 12.4(24)T3 IOS. It is configured with WCCPv2 using L2 mask redirection. I am using service groups and associated extended ACLs to select which subnets I want to redirect port 80 traffic from.
It is working fine for the subnet 192.168.1.0/24....
int gi0/2 ip wccp 10 redirect in ip address 192.168.1.99 255.255.255.0
... however, there is OSPF running between the router and a Mikrotik device directly connected to this interface. The gateway addresses for all the client subnets are on the Mikrotik. Traffic from other subnets, e.g. 192.168.2.0/24, 192.168.3.0/24 come in on this interface and I want to redirect those too. But it appears that the redirection doesn't work for those subnets (I don't see any hits on the relevant ACL for any subnet except 192.168.1.0/24).
It seems like the router only wants to redirect traffic for subnets that it has an IP address in itself. Admittedly, all of the example configs i've found on cisco.com are for redirecting traffic from directly connected subnets but I can't find anything that denies thie possibility of redirecting any traffic that comes in on a given interface.
The question is, is this how WCCPv2 redirection works? i.e., the router must have an IP address in the subnet to be redirected?
I recently configured WCCP with a Sophos Web Filter on my network it works good but the problem I am having is I have two 5520s so I am directing the device to look at 2 different IP addresses and since the devices are in an Active/Passive failover. The problem is because the second device is in a passive failover it is not responding which is throwing connection errors to my Sophos device. I know you can have a single management connection for the ASA's but is there a way to have a single IP for the ASAs for the WCCP?
I'm trying to use port redirection to allow outside access to a internal web server. As far as I can see, everything is configured properly. The Open Port Checker tool from yougotsingle.com says that the port (80) is open. However when I goto access it the connection times out. The external address is static from my ISP, and I will call it xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx. The server is at 10.1.1.20, and is functioning properly over the LAN.
I would like to do something verys imple with IPTABLES but i canno't find any "simple" way to achieve...iptables -t nat -A PREROUTING -i eth0 -s 10.0.0.0/24 -p tcp --dport 80 -j DNAT --to squid-box:3128.The idea is to redirect any connection to any host which try to connect to port tcp 80 being redirected to a server called squid-box on port 3128.I have seen that for proxy squid implementation with ASA i had to use wccp but for my personnal understanding.
We have 2 TS (Terminal Servers) and have configured the 1st RDP using my public address (say 18.104.22.168) on port 3389. it is working very well of course. However I need setup my 2nd TS but will use port 7777 on the same public address which is not working.I am using ASDM 6.3 and firmware 8.3.1.Is this a limitation for this IOS?
Web auth redirect URL gets dropped if stateful firewall is between webauth host and switch management interface. Aaron at Cisco live london kinda hinted about maybe Cisco working on this ? We can't disable stateful inspection. Is there any other solutions or workarounds ?
"Although this approach introduces additional hops in the return path from the switch to the host, it produces negligible load on the default router and intervening infrastructure since only the WebAuth traffic from the switch to the host follows this path. In campus designs that do not use SVIs on the data VLAN,6 a default route is typically already configured. In this case, no additional configuration is required to support WebAuth.
However, problems may arise in the case in which traffic to the default router is bridged through a stateful firewall. The original SYN packet in the TCP handshake is consumed by the access switch, so the first packet that the firewall sees is the SYN-ACK packet from the access switch. Stateful firewalls typically drop SYN-ACK packets if they have not seen the original SYN packet.In this case, you will need to turn off stateful inspection for ports 80 and 443 on the firewall."
I am currently trying to enable WCCP between a Cisco ASA 5512 firewall and Barraccuda Webfilter 410 Vx applicance. The ASA firewall is running IOS version 8.6(1)2 and the Barracuda is funning firemware 6.0.0.013. Both the ASA and Barracuda are in the same network and can ping eachother. The ASA has several interfaces, outside, inside, data and dmz. The PCs and barracuda appliance are behind the data interface. ASA data IP 172.16.18.1 Barracuda IP 172.16.18.40 All PCs in the 172.16.18.0/24 subnet use the ASA as the default gateway and should have web requests redirected to the Barracuda.
What the support for WCCP on a FWSM running 4.0(7) is like, if there is any at all ?
I've read that the earliest PIX release that supports WCCP was 7.2(1) but I'm not sure how FWSM 4.0(7) aligns with the PIX versions.The only doc's i can find refrencing WCCP on a 6500 with FWSM is in the 6500 12.2 IOS guide.
I have a IOS firewall on a 2921 router, zone-based config. The remote and main sites have Cisco WAAS , running 4.4.1 software. I am using WCCP redirection on the WAAS/router combination. If I leave it off the firewall passes SSH correctly to the devices on the other side of the firewall. If I enable WCCP the SSH connections fail. The SSH to the router itself is fine, I am not using the self zone for router protection. I had seen a few posts on WAAS but the only one mentioning a config statement in the firewall was on 4.0 WAAS and the command is no longer on the IOS firewall. Is this supposed to work transparently or am I missing a config?
I am having difficulty following the logic of the port-translation. Here is the configuration on a 5505 with 8.3,So I would have thought the outside access-list should reference the 'mapped' port but even with 3398 open I cannot remote desktop to the host. If I open 3389 then I can connect successfully.
I'd like to see some REAL LIFE comparisons of ASA firewall throughput (a bit like this one for ISR G2 Routers - [URL].
The reason I ask is that I recently upgraded a firewall from an ASA5505 to an ASA5520 on a small network where the only outside connectivity was a single 10meg Internet circuit with an IPSEC VPN (not landed on the firewall but on a router) to another site.
When I swapped out the firewall the users noticed a big improvement. The firewall is not doing anything out of the ordinary - no IPS or VPN, just standard state full inspection.
We are using the newest release of AD Agent (22.214.171.124.1, built 598). The ASA Firewalls 5520 are having the software release 8.4(3)8 installed.When somebody tries to connect thru the Identity based firewalls from a citrix published desktop environment (PDI) the connection is not possible. Checking the ip-of-user mapping on the firewalls (show user-identity ip-of-user USERNAME) mostly doesn't show the mapping of the USERNAME and the PDI the user is logged in. The user-of-ip mapping of the PDIs IP-address shows mostly other users, which then are used to authenticate the acces thru the firewalls.
What is interesting, that on the AD Agent using "adacfg.exe cache list | find /i "USERNAME"" i can't see the PDIs IP-address neither because it is mapped to another user.Is Citrix Published Desktop environment supported to connect thru Identity based Firewalls? How AD Agent, Domain Controllers and Firewalls are working together? On the firewalls with "show user-identity ad-agent we see, the following:
I try to launch a LAND Attack against my firewall ASA 5520. Everything will work fine. But why, I think it should not work. I use a little tool where I can user a spoofed address, with a cluster shell and attack the firewall interface with the source of 127.0.0.1 ore the ip address of the interface as the source and destination. Then I get a cpu load of 89% with only two host. With IP tables I can use kernel processes to prevent this. But I don´t find anything for ASA.
Two different WAN links get connected to the firewall via two routers.(Different ip subnets).I need to get this two wan streams seperatly to the core switches.Core switches sits.Active/Stanby senario. If the Active core goes down Stndby Core will have take over the traffic. My design is correct ,if not what do i need to change. ASA is 5520.
I have CSS in single arm deployment model. I want to configure port redirection for the servers. Servers are actually running web service on port TCP 3636. Which is accessibale by VIP http://192.168.200.87:3636 but I dont want to give user this URL I want the user to use standard HTTP URL as mention below, I want user to open http://192.168.200.87 and once they access this URL automatically CSS redirect them to port 3636. How I can achive this. I am using IP addresses for the load balancing.
I have successfully set up a 5505 as a cut-through proxy so that wireless users are required to log in when they open a browser to access the Internet. Is there a way to take them to the original page they requested after the login is complete, rather than having it sit at the screen where it is says they are logged in?
I have a serious problem with my corporate firewall, witch is an ASA 5520, fv 8.3, with 8 +1 interfaces. It suddenly started to crash every 10/20 minutes and rebooting alone.
First of all I checked system resources witch are in a very low usage state. I also checked interfaces errors, but nothing strange come out o from error counters analysis. I tried disabling logging and all the service policy rules configured, but nothing changed.
Nothing changed and firewall continue restarting by itself.
Last logs I received before crash were:
%ASA-4-711004: Task ran for 35 m sec, Process = Dispatch Unit, PC = 84a619e, Call stack = %ASA-4-711004: Task ran for 35 m sec, Process = Dispatch Unit, PC = 84a619e, Call stack = 0x084A619E 0x084A6512 0x084A70E1 0x084A7987 0x084A7AAA 0x08558B9B 0x08558E8A 0x083D3518 0x083CA145 0x080659D1 0x089196D9 0x08919790 0x089FF711 0x08A27468
Here the sh crash info command on module 0, after last reboot: [Code] ......
we are having a firewall asa 5520 .we have connected the management port and inside port to internal network and dmz port to dmz network.now we need to configure tacacs and other management tool on dmz devices through management port. The problem is the management devices tacacs and other are placed in internal network.
I have an ASA 5520 in my company which does all our NAT and Firewall access control. Currently there is a rule in place to allow an incoming connection on port 2222 from a specific ip address to allow access to a web app our developers created. This is a test before the web app is released live. Now the web app can communicate with the specific address and port but the incoming connection on port 2222 isn't getting through. Everything looks great in the firewall but how can I log any hits this ACL takes to identify any potential problems?