<?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: Escalation for FDM on FTD in Network Security</title>
    <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/escalation-for-fdm-on-ftd/m-p/4567190#M1088075</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;Thanks&amp;nbsp; i got it&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks I got it ... I I think&amp;nbsp; interpreted wrong.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Wed, 09 Mar 2022 15:40:45 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>cm</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2022-03-09T15:40:45Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Escalation for FDM on FTD</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/escalation-for-fdm-on-ftd/m-p/4563003#M1087905</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi Cisco&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I would like escalate to Cisco Technician. After few days of try to get things working with FDM to get Identity NAT Working. I have the a problem as my there seem to be handover problem on one of the legs for FTD.&amp;nbsp; I have enclosed the configuration and ping results&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 03 Mar 2022 13:33:57 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/escalation-for-fdm-on-ftd/m-p/4563003#M1087905</guid>
      <dc:creator>cm</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2022-03-03T13:33:57Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Escalation for FDM on FTD</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/escalation-for-fdm-on-ftd/m-p/4563036#M1087907</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;This is the (free) Cisco community, not the (paid) Cisco TAC. Members here help out of goodwill.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Your NAT rules should use (inside,outside). Also, when you run packet-tracer, make the input inside and use the real IP address of the server you want to test. (not the public NAT address). Finally, your incoming access-list entries allow ip any incoming to your servers. This is generally a very bad idea as it essentially exposes the server to the Internet on all ports.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 03 Mar 2022 14:19:42 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/escalation-for-fdm-on-ftd/m-p/4563036#M1087907</guid>
      <dc:creator>Marvin Rhoads</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2022-03-03T14:19:42Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Escalation for FDM on FTD</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/escalation-for-fdm-on-ftd/m-p/4563054#M1087908</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Adding to Marvins answer: Your Firepower uses completely outdated software. You really should update to a recent version. But this is not related to your problem.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 03 Mar 2022 14:35:48 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/escalation-for-fdm-on-ftd/m-p/4563054#M1087908</guid>
      <dc:creator>Karsten Iwen</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2022-03-03T14:35:48Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Escalation for FDM on FTD</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/escalation-for-fdm-on-ftd/m-p/4563085#M1087910</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;contact same TAC case it was before and re-open to help you with cisco technician.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 03 Mar 2022 15:04:17 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/escalation-for-fdm-on-ftd/m-p/4563085#M1087910</guid>
      <dc:creator>balaji.bandi</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2022-03-03T15:04:17Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Escalation for FDM on FTD</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/escalation-for-fdm-on-ftd/m-p/4563192#M1087918</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;&lt;a href="https://community.cisco.com/t5/user/viewprofilepage/user-id/326046"&gt;@Marvin Rhoads&lt;/a&gt;&amp;nbsp;the idea is for impliment NAT 0 or identity NAT. where there is no NAT at all for the public address... But I m not getting that all .&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 03 Mar 2022 17:04:15 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/escalation-for-fdm-on-ftd/m-p/4563192#M1087918</guid>
      <dc:creator>cm</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2022-03-03T17:04:15Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Escalation for FDM on FTD</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/escalation-for-fdm-on-ftd/m-p/4564194#M1087946</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Can you explain in more detail what you are trying to do? NAT 0 is typically used when the host(s) need to traverse a VPN and not be NATted (NAT exemption).&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 04 Mar 2022 15:14:38 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/escalation-for-fdm-on-ftd/m-p/4564194#M1087946</guid>
      <dc:creator>Marvin Rhoads</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2022-03-04T15:14:38Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Escalation for FDM on FTD</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/escalation-for-fdm-on-ftd/m-p/4564258#M1087950</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;&lt;a href="https://community.cisco.com/t5/user/viewprofilepage/user-id/326046"&gt;@Marvin Rhoads&lt;/a&gt;&amp;nbsp; I want to protect my mail and other servers with public addresses&amp;nbsp; , But I don't want to change the IP Address on the servers.&amp;nbsp; So I m using FDM to deploy not FMC.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 04 Mar 2022 16:23:59 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/escalation-for-fdm-on-ftd/m-p/4564258#M1087950</guid>
      <dc:creator>cm</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2022-03-04T16:23:59Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Escalation for FDM on FTD</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/escalation-for-fdm-on-ftd/m-p/4564770#M1087969</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;So you want something like this example?&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;A href="https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/security/asa/asa96/configuration/firewall/asa-96-firewall-config/nat-reference.html#ID-2091-00000009" target="_blank"&gt;https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/security/asa/asa96/configuration/firewall/asa-96-firewall-config/nat-reference.html#ID-2091-00000009&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;That's on ASA but the concept is the same. You might also take a look at this free Labminutes video for a demonstration on how to setup static NAT using FDM:&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;A href="http://www.labminutes.com/sec0232_ftd_61_firepower_device_manager_configuration_1" target="_blank"&gt;http://www.labminutes.com/sec0232_ftd_61_firepower_device_manager_configuration_1&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sun, 06 Mar 2022 03:58:48 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/escalation-for-fdm-on-ftd/m-p/4564770#M1087969</guid>
      <dc:creator>Marvin Rhoads</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2022-03-06T03:58:48Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Escalation for FDM on FTD</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/escalation-for-fdm-on-ftd/m-p/4567190#M1088075</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Thanks&amp;nbsp; i got it&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks I got it ... I I think&amp;nbsp; interpreted wrong.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 09 Mar 2022 15:40:45 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/escalation-for-fdm-on-ftd/m-p/4567190#M1088075</guid>
      <dc:creator>cm</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2022-03-09T15:40:45Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

