<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Re: Zone-Based Firewall: &amp;quot;pass&amp;quot; action doesn't work with UDP...only &amp;quot;inspect&amp;quot; in Network Security</title>
    <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/zone-based-firewall-quot-pass-quot-action-doesn-t-work-with-udp/m-p/3786673#M1049235</link>
    <description>Great that you got this sorted. FYI, match protocol tftp and matching an&lt;BR /&gt;ACL on port 69 are same as you got to know now.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;**** Remember to rate useful posts&lt;BR /&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Thu, 24 Jan 2019 03:40:44 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Mohammed al Baqari</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2019-01-24T03:40:44Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Zone-Based Firewall: "pass" action doesn't work with UDP...only "inspect"</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/zone-based-firewall-quot-pass-quot-action-doesn-t-work-with-udp/m-p/3785525#M1049152</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi everyone,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I've been experimenting with ZBFW using three routers, all running&amp;nbsp;15.3(3)XB12 and have run across an interesting problem.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;R3(Client= 3.3.3.3) -----Fa0/1.33 [R1(ZBFW)]-Serial1/3 ----- R4(Internet-Rtr = 4.4.4.4)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;When class-maps are configured (&lt;STRONG&gt;matching any UDP protocols&lt;/STRONG&gt; such as TFTP or DNS) and the associated Policy-Map uses the "pass" action, traffic is passed from source-to-destination...but the reply traffic is dropped (even though a matching zone-pair is applied in the reverse direction also specifying "pass" in the Policy-Map).&amp;nbsp; If the Policy-Map is applied with an "inspect" action...traffic passes bidirectionally.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;The "pass" action within the policy-map (used by ZBFW) works just fine with TCP and ICMP traffic...just not UDP-based traffic.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;H3&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;Any ideas?&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/H3&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;ZBFW configuration with "pass" actions that &lt;U&gt;drops&lt;/U&gt; reply-traffic:&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="p1"&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="p1"&gt;ZBFW#sh run&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="p1"&gt;Building configuration...&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="p1"&gt;!&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="p1"&gt;version 15.3&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="p1"&gt;!&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="p1"&gt;hostname ZBFW&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="p1"&gt;!&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="p1"&gt;ip cef&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="p1"&gt;!&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="p1"&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="p1"&gt;class-map type inspect match-all ICMP&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="p1"&gt;match access-group 102&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="p1"&gt;class-map type inspect match-all Pass-TFTP&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="p1"&gt;match protocol tftp&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="p1"&gt;class-map type inspect match-all DNS&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="p1"&gt;match protocol dns&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="p1"&gt;!&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="p1"&gt;policy-map type inspect In-to-Out&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="p1"&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="p1"&gt;class type inspect ICMP&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="p1"&gt;&lt;SPAN class="Apple-converted-space"&gt;&amp;nbsp; &lt;/SPAN&gt;inspect&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="p1"&gt;class type inspect Pass-TFTP&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="p1"&gt;&lt;SPAN class="Apple-converted-space"&gt;&amp;nbsp; pass&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="p1"&gt;class type inspect DNS&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="p1"&gt;&lt;SPAN class="Apple-converted-space"&gt;&amp;nbsp; &lt;/SPAN&gt;pass&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="p1"&gt;class class-default&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="p1"&gt;&lt;SPAN class="Apple-converted-space"&gt;&amp;nbsp; &lt;/SPAN&gt;drop&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="p1"&gt;!&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="p1"&gt;policy-map type inspect Out-to-In&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="p1"&gt;class type inspect Pass-TFTP&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="p1"&gt;&lt;SPAN class="Apple-converted-space"&gt;&amp;nbsp; &lt;/SPAN&gt;pass&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="p1"&gt;class type inspect DNS&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="p1"&gt;&lt;SPAN class="Apple-converted-space"&gt;&amp;nbsp; &lt;/SPAN&gt;pass&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="p1"&gt;class class-default&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="p1"&gt;&lt;SPAN class="Apple-converted-space"&gt;&amp;nbsp; &lt;/SPAN&gt;drop&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="p1"&gt;!&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="p1"&gt;zone security Payroll ##(&lt;STRONG&gt;this is the zone connected to R3&lt;/STRONG&gt;)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="p1"&gt;zone security Internet ##(&lt;STRONG&gt;this is the zone connected to R4&lt;/STRONG&gt;)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="p1"&gt;!&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="p1"&gt;zone-pair security Payroll-to-Internet source Payroll destination Internet&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="p1"&gt;service-policy type inspect In-to-Out&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="p1"&gt;!&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="p1"&gt;zone-pair security Internet-to-Payroll source Internet destination Payroll&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="p1"&gt;service-policy type inspect Out-to-In&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="p1"&gt;!&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="p1"&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="p1"&gt;interface FastEthernet0/1.33&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="p1"&gt;Description To-R3-Client-Router&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="p1"&gt;encapsulation dot1Q 33&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="p1"&gt;ip address 3.3.3.1 255.255.255.0&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="p1"&gt;zone-member security Payroll&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="p1"&gt;!&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="p1"&gt;interface Serial1/3&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="p1"&gt;Description To-R4-Internet-Router&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="p1"&gt;ip address 4.4.4.1 255.255.255.0&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="p1"&gt;zone-member security Internet&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="p1"&gt;clock rate 128000&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="p1"&gt;!&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="p1"&gt;ip route 44.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 4.4.4.4&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="p1"&gt;!&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="p1"&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="p1"&gt;access-list 102 permit icmp any any&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="p1"&gt;!&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="p1"&gt;end&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="p2"&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="p2"&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="p2"&gt;***************************&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="p2"&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;UDP Traffic initiated on R3-Client (TFTP-based):&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="p2"&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="p2"&gt;R3-CLient#&lt;STRONG&gt;copy tftp flash:&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Address or name of remote host [4.4.4.4]?&lt;BR /&gt;Source filename [startup-config]? Test-Config&lt;BR /&gt;Destination filename [Test-Config]?&lt;BR /&gt;Accessing tftp://4.4.4.4/Test-Config...&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;%Error opening tftp://4.4.4.4/Test-Config (Timed out)&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;R3-CLient#&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="p2"&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="p2"&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;Below is proof that this UDP-based TFTP traffic is reaching the R4-Internet router, and being responded to...but being dropped at the Zone-Based Firewall on the return path:&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="p2"&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;R4-Internet#show log&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Log Buffer (4096 bytes):&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;.Jan 22 13:21:49.903: &lt;STRONG&gt;UDP: rcvd src=3.3.3.3(55338), dst=4.4.4.4(69)&lt;/STRONG&gt;, length=28&lt;BR /&gt;.Jan 22 13:21:49.903: Reserved port 52077 in Transport Port Agent for UDP IP type 1&lt;BR /&gt;.Jan 22 13:21:49.907: TFTP: Server request for port 55338, socket_id 0x4D85DFB8 for process 276&lt;BR /&gt;.Jan 22 13:21:49.907: TFTP: read request from host 3.3.3.3(55338) via Serial1/3&lt;BR /&gt;.Jan 22 13:21:49.907: TFTP: Looking for Test-Config&lt;BR /&gt;.Jan 22 13:21:49.907: TFTP: Opened flash:Test-Config, fd 0, size 1688 for process 276&lt;BR /&gt;.Jan 22 13:21:49.911: &lt;STRONG&gt;TFTP: Sending block 1 (retry 0), len 512&lt;/STRONG&gt;, socket_id 0x4D85DFB8&lt;BR /&gt;.Jan 22 13:21:49.911: &lt;STRONG&gt;UDP: sent src=4.4.4.4(52077), dst=3.3.3.3(55338),&lt;/STRONG&gt; length=524&lt;BR /&gt;.Jan 22 13:21:53.903: UDP: rcvd src=3.3.3.3(55338), dst=4.4.4.4(69), length=28&lt;BR /&gt;.Jan 22 13:21:53.903: Reserved port 63626 in Transport Port Agent for UDP IP type 1&lt;BR /&gt;.Jan 22 13:21:53.903: TFTP: Server request for port 55338, socket_id 0x4D9D70A8 for process 300&lt;BR /&gt;.Jan 22 13:21:53.907: TFTP: read request from host 3.3.3.3(55338) via Serial1/3&lt;BR /&gt;.Jan 22 13:21:53.907: TFTP: Looking for Test-Config&lt;BR /&gt;.Jan 22 13:21:53.907: TFTP: Opened flash:Test-Config, fd 1, size 1688 for process 300&lt;BR /&gt;.Jan 22 13:21:53.907: TFTP: Sending block 1 (retry 0), len 512, socket_id 0x4D9D70A8&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;*****************************************&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;The same thing happens with DNS traffic:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;R3-CLient#ping R4Loop&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;Translating "R4Loop"...domain server (4.4.4.4)&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;% Unrecognized host or address, or protocol not running.&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;R4-Internet#debug domain&lt;BR /&gt;Domain Name System debugging is on&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;R4-Internet#&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;.Jan 22 13:26:37.843: &lt;STRONG&gt;DNS: Incoming UDP query&lt;/STRONG&gt; (id#36141)&lt;BR /&gt;.Jan 22 13:26:37.843: DNS: Type 1 DNS query (id#36141) for host 'R4Loop' from 3.3.3.3(53811)&lt;BR /&gt;.Jan 22 13:26:37.843: DNS: Servicing request using view default&lt;BR /&gt;.Jan 22 13:26:37.843: search_nametype_index: R4Loop&lt;BR /&gt;.Jan 22 13:26:37.843: search_nametype_index: found R4Loop for R4Loop&lt;BR /&gt;.Jan 22 13:26:37.843: &lt;STRONG&gt;DNS: Reply to client 3.3.3.3/53811 query A&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;.Jan 22 13:26:37.843: DNS: Finished processing query (id#36141) in 0.000 secs&lt;BR /&gt;.Jan 22 13:26:37.843: &lt;STRONG&gt;DNS: Sending response to 3.3.3.3/53811, len 40&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;****************************************&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;Now I change both Policy-Maps to use the "inspect" action. After doing so, my UDP traffic (both TFTP and DNS) are successful:&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;*****************************************&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;ZBFW(config)#&lt;BR /&gt;ZBFW(config)#policy-map type inspect In-to-Out&lt;BR /&gt;ZBFW(config-pmap)#class type inspect Pass-TFTP&lt;BR /&gt;ZBFW(config-pmap-c)#no pass&lt;BR /&gt;ZBFW(config-pmap-c)#inspect&lt;BR /&gt;ZBFW(config-pmap-c)#exit&lt;BR /&gt;ZBFW(config-pmap)#class type inspect DNS&lt;BR /&gt;ZBFW(config-pmap-c)#no pass&lt;BR /&gt;ZBFW(config-pmap-c)#inspect&lt;BR /&gt;ZBFW(config-pmap-c)#exit&lt;BR /&gt;ZBFW(config-pmap)#exit&lt;BR /&gt;ZBFW(config)#policy-map type inspect Out-to-In&lt;BR /&gt;ZBFW(config-pmap)#class type inspect Pass-TFTP&lt;BR /&gt;ZBFW(config-pmap-c)#no pass&lt;BR /&gt;ZBFW(config-pmap-c)#inspect&lt;BR /&gt;ZBFW(config-pmap-c)#exit&lt;BR /&gt;ZBFW(config-pmap)#class type inspect DNS&lt;BR /&gt;ZBFW(config-pmap-c)#no pass&lt;BR /&gt;ZBFW(config-pmap-c)#inspect&lt;BR /&gt;ZBFW(config-pmap-c)#end&lt;BR /&gt;ZBFW#&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;**************************&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;R3-CLient#&lt;STRONG&gt;copy tftp flash:&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Address or name of remote host [4.4.4.4]?&lt;BR /&gt;Source filename [Test-Config]?&lt;BR /&gt;Destination filename [Test-Config]?&lt;BR /&gt;Accessing tftp://4.4.4.4/Test-Config...&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;Loading Test-Config from 4.4.4.4 (via FastEthernet0/0): !&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;[OK - 1688 bytes]&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;1688 bytes copied in 0.752 secs (2245 bytes/sec)&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;R3-CLient#&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;R3-CLient#&lt;STRONG&gt;ping R4Loop&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Translating "R4Loop"...domain server (4.4.4.4) [OK]&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Type escape sequence to abort.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;Sending 5, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 44.44.44.4, timeout is 2 seconds:&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;!!!!!&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 21 Feb 2020 16:41:22 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/zone-based-firewall-quot-pass-quot-action-doesn-t-work-with-udp/m-p/3785525#M1049152</guid>
      <dc:creator>kbogart368</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-02-21T16:41:22Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Zone-Based Firewall: "pass" action doesn't work with UDP...only "inspect"</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/zone-based-firewall-quot-pass-quot-action-doesn-t-work-with-udp/m-p/3785706#M1049160</link>
      <description>Hi,&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;To my understanding, pass action has to be applied in both directions&lt;BR /&gt;because it treats the router as stateless firewall. I don't think TCP or&lt;BR /&gt;ICMP will be allowed if you don't have a zone-pair configure on the reverse&lt;BR /&gt;direction with pass action.&lt;BR /&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 23 Jan 2019 05:31:04 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/zone-based-firewall-quot-pass-quot-action-doesn-t-work-with-udp/m-p/3785706#M1049160</guid>
      <dc:creator>Mohammed al Baqari</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2019-01-23T05:31:04Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Zone-Based Firewall: "pass" action doesn't work with UDP...only "inspect"</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/zone-based-firewall-quot-pass-quot-action-doesn-t-work-with-udp/m-p/3786123#M1049178</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Thank you for the reply Mohammed, however I do have zone-pairs in both directions...both of which are referencing Policy-Maps&amp;nbsp;containing the "pass" action for TFTP and DNS traffic, so that doesn't appear to be the reason this traffic is being dropped on the return path:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Here's a snippet of the config I posted in my original message:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="p1"&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="p1"&gt;zone-pair security &lt;STRONG&gt;Payroll-to-Internet&lt;/STRONG&gt; source Payroll destination Internet&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="p1"&gt;service-policy type inspect In-to-Out&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="p1"&gt;!&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="p1"&gt;zone-pair security &lt;STRONG&gt;Internet-to-Payroll&lt;/STRONG&gt; source Internet destination Payroll&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="p1"&gt;service-policy type inspect Out-to-In&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 23 Jan 2019 14:47:23 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/zone-based-firewall-quot-pass-quot-action-doesn-t-work-with-udp/m-p/3786123#M1049178</guid>
      <dc:creator>kbogart368</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2019-01-23T14:47:23Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Zone-Based Firewall: "pass" action doesn't work with UDP...only "inspect"</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/zone-based-firewall-quot-pass-quot-action-doesn-t-work-with-udp/m-p/3786167#M1049203</link>
      <description>But for tftp you can't use pass and match port 69 only because tftp use&lt;BR /&gt;dynamic high port for data transfer.  You need inspect action for tftp&lt;BR /&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 23 Jan 2019 15:28:46 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/zone-based-firewall-quot-pass-quot-action-doesn-t-work-with-udp/m-p/3786167#M1049203</guid>
      <dc:creator>Mohammed al Baqari</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2019-01-23T15:28:46Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Zone-Based Firewall: "pass" action doesn't work with UDP...only "inspect"</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/zone-based-firewall-quot-pass-quot-action-doesn-t-work-with-udp/m-p/3786223#M1049218</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hello Mohammed,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I am not matching TFTP by referencing an ACL.&amp;nbsp; I'm using the "&lt;STRONG&gt;match protocol tftp&lt;/STRONG&gt;" statement within my Class-Map.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;However, you're right...&lt;STRONG&gt;I didn't think about the dynamic nature of TFTP ports&lt;/STRONG&gt;. And (for protocols that don't randomize their ports like DNS) &lt;STRONG&gt;I was assuming that "match protocol" would match well-known port-numbers regardless of whether they were seen in the Source or Destination TCP/UDP Port fields...but is clearly not the case.&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;So the answers to this problem are:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;--When using the "match protocol" option within a Class-Map (referenced by a ZBFW Policy-Map), all that is being matched against are well-known &lt;STRONG&gt;&lt;EM&gt;destination port numbers (not source ports)&lt;/EM&gt;.&lt;/STRONG&gt; Therefore:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;----A. If the "inspect" action is used within the Policy-Map, t&lt;SPAN&gt;he "match protocol" will match on the well-known destination port number of the protocol, and allow the outbound traffic to pass between zones. As this occurs,&amp;nbsp;&lt;/SPAN&gt;the outgoing traffic will create a stateful entry in which both the source (Ephemeral port) and destination (well-known port) port numbers will be cached.&amp;nbsp; Therefore the swapping of source/destination port numbers (when return traffic is received) can be recognized and allowed to be received.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;----B.&lt;SPAN&gt;If the "pass" action is used within the Policy-Map,&amp;nbsp;no stateful entry is created in the router.&amp;nbsp; Therefore,&amp;nbsp;the "match protocol" will match on the well-known destination port number of the protocol, and allow the outbound traffic to transparently pass between zones. However...&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;----------i. I&lt;/SPAN&gt;f reply traffic is received in which the well-known port-number is now in the TCP/UDP &lt;STRONG&gt;Source Port&lt;/STRONG&gt; field...the "match protocol" field will not match. Traffic will not be matched and will be dropped.&amp;nbsp; In this case, an Access-List should be utilized to match return traffic in which the well-known port number is now in the TCP/UDP Source Port field.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;----------ii. If reply traffic is received that&amp;nbsp;has swapped the well-known port number for&amp;nbsp;an Ephemeral Port (such as is utilized with TFTP data transfers) then the "match protocol" field will not match and traffic will be dropped. Creating a matching Access-List will be pointless (unless one is willing to permit the entire range of Ephemeral Ports to pass).&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks for helping me to understand this!&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Keith&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 23 Jan 2019 16:29:30 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/zone-based-firewall-quot-pass-quot-action-doesn-t-work-with-udp/m-p/3786223#M1049218</guid>
      <dc:creator>kbogart368</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2019-01-23T16:29:30Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Zone-Based Firewall: "pass" action doesn't work with UDP...only "inspect"</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/zone-based-firewall-quot-pass-quot-action-doesn-t-work-with-udp/m-p/3786673#M1049235</link>
      <description>Great that you got this sorted. FYI, match protocol tftp and matching an&lt;BR /&gt;ACL on port 69 are same as you got to know now.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;**** Remember to rate useful posts&lt;BR /&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 24 Jan 2019 03:40:44 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/zone-based-firewall-quot-pass-quot-action-doesn-t-work-with-udp/m-p/3786673#M1049235</guid>
      <dc:creator>Mohammed al Baqari</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2019-01-24T03:40:44Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

