<?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 ASA NO NAT Configuration - 9.6(4)23 in Network Security</title>
    <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/asa-no-nat-configuration-9-6-4-23/m-p/4595568#M1089325</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;We are in the process of implementing a NO NAT configuration on one of our firewalls and are running into an issue.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;We have created an object-group for source IPs that will have the NO NAT configuration applied.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;object-group network NO_NAT&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;&amp;nbsp;network-object host 1.1.1.1&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;We then created a network object that contains the destination - which would be internet based:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;object network NO_NAT_DEST&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;&amp;nbsp;subnet 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;nat (inside,outside) source static NO_NAT&amp;nbsp;NO_NAT destination static NO_NAT_DEST&amp;nbsp;NO_NAT_DEST no-proxy-arp&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;All internet based traffic is routing as expected - no NAT applied. But when traffic destined for a private address routes through the firewall (DMZ destined), the traffic is routed the same as the internet based traffic. This looks to be because the subnet in the NO_NAT_DEST object matches the 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 default route.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;My thinking is that we implement two separate NAT statements - one that contains an object-group that contains private networks as the destination and one that contains the 0.0.0.0 destination. Configure the NAT for the private destinations first - then configure the NAT for the 0.0.0.0 destination. That way the private destination NAT is processed first and routed accordingly but anything not destined for a private network will be processed by the 0.0.0.0 destination NAT.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Will this work as expected?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;What would be the best way to implement this NO NAT configuration?&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Wed, 20 Apr 2022 00:48:36 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>mbrandon32</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2022-04-20T00:48:36Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>ASA NO NAT Configuration - 9.6(4)23</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/asa-no-nat-configuration-9-6-4-23/m-p/4595568#M1089325</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;We are in the process of implementing a NO NAT configuration on one of our firewalls and are running into an issue.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;We have created an object-group for source IPs that will have the NO NAT configuration applied.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;object-group network NO_NAT&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;&amp;nbsp;network-object host 1.1.1.1&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;We then created a network object that contains the destination - which would be internet based:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;object network NO_NAT_DEST&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;&amp;nbsp;subnet 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;nat (inside,outside) source static NO_NAT&amp;nbsp;NO_NAT destination static NO_NAT_DEST&amp;nbsp;NO_NAT_DEST no-proxy-arp&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;All internet based traffic is routing as expected - no NAT applied. But when traffic destined for a private address routes through the firewall (DMZ destined), the traffic is routed the same as the internet based traffic. This looks to be because the subnet in the NO_NAT_DEST object matches the 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 default route.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;My thinking is that we implement two separate NAT statements - one that contains an object-group that contains private networks as the destination and one that contains the 0.0.0.0 destination. Configure the NAT for the private destinations first - then configure the NAT for the 0.0.0.0 destination. That way the private destination NAT is processed first and routed accordingly but anything not destined for a private network will be processed by the 0.0.0.0 destination NAT.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Will this work as expected?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;What would be the best way to implement this NO NAT configuration?&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 20 Apr 2022 00:48:36 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/asa-no-nat-configuration-9-6-4-23/m-p/4595568#M1089325</guid>
      <dc:creator>mbrandon32</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2022-04-20T00:48:36Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: ASA NOT NAT Configuration - 9.6(4)23</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/asa-no-nat-configuration-9-6-4-23/m-p/4595575#M1089326</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;&lt;a href="https://community.cisco.com/t5/user/viewprofilepage/user-id/364416"&gt;@mbrandon32&lt;/a&gt; yes create the more specific no NAT rule first and/or do a route-lookup on the NAT rule.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Route lookup—(Routed mode only; interfaces specified.) Specify &lt;STRONG id="ID-2090-00000af8__ID-2090-00000b4c" class="ph b"&gt;route-lookup&lt;/STRONG&gt; to determine the egress interface using a route lookup instead of using the interface specified in the NAT command. See &lt;A class="xref" href="https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/security/asa/asa910/configuration/firewall/asa-910-firewall-config/nat-reference.html#ID-2091-000003a6" target="_blank"&gt;Determining the Egress Interface&lt;/A&gt; for more information.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 19 Apr 2022 17:06:23 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/asa-no-nat-configuration-9-6-4-23/m-p/4595575#M1089326</guid>
      <dc:creator>Rob Ingram</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2022-04-19T17:06:23Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: ASA NOT NAT Configuration - 9.6(4)23</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/asa-no-nat-configuration-9-6-4-23/m-p/4595650#M1089327</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;config another NO NAT and make it above this NAT by add "1" , and the issue is solve OR config after-auto in NAT which push this NO NAT "0.0.0.0" down to list of NAT.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 19 Apr 2022 19:03:18 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/asa-no-nat-configuration-9-6-4-23/m-p/4595650#M1089327</guid>
      <dc:creator>MHM Cisco World</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2022-04-19T19:03:18Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: ASA NOT NAT Configuration - 9.6(4)23</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/asa-no-nat-configuration-9-6-4-23/m-p/4595663#M1089329</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;&lt;a href="https://community.cisco.com/t5/user/viewprofilepage/user-id/97036"&gt;@Rob Ingram&lt;/a&gt;&amp;nbsp;I missed the&amp;nbsp;&lt;STRONG&gt;route-lookup&lt;/STRONG&gt; configuration. Looking into &lt;STRONG&gt;route-lookup&lt;/STRONG&gt; in more detail, we should just be able to configure the following:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;nat (inside,outside) source static NO_NAT NO_NAT route-lookup&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Correct?&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 19 Apr 2022 18:54:12 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/asa-no-nat-configuration-9-6-4-23/m-p/4595663#M1089329</guid>
      <dc:creator>mbrandon32</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2022-04-19T18:54:12Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: ASA NOT NAT Configuration - 9.6(4)23</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/asa-no-nat-configuration-9-6-4-23/m-p/4595827#M1089337</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;nat (inside,outside) source static NO_NAT NO_NAT route-lookup&amp;nbsp;&lt;/STRONG&gt;did the trick. Thanks!&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 20 Apr 2022 01:38:45 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/asa-no-nat-configuration-9-6-4-23/m-p/4595827#M1089337</guid>
      <dc:creator>mbrandon32</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2022-04-20T01:38:45Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

