<?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 Migrate network object group members; risk in Network Security</title>
    <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/migrate-network-object-group-members-risk/m-p/2369315#M306521</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; We upgraded to new 5555 hardware and jumped from 8.2 to 9.1 last year. Our objects listing is now a bit messy. I have never run the "Migrate Network Object Group Members" menu option in asdm. I see what it is going to do, I am not sure it really helps me clean old objects, it seems low risk, but when I walk up to execution, there are a lot of changes it wants to make. We always save backup configurations but, if there are "gotchas" I don't want to put the company in that position. What has been the communities, Cisco's experience? Thanks for any feedback. jc&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Tue, 12 Mar 2019 03:23:32 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>john.cunningham</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2019-03-12T03:23:32Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Migrate network object group members; risk</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/migrate-network-object-group-members-risk/m-p/2369315#M306521</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; We upgraded to new 5555 hardware and jumped from 8.2 to 9.1 last year. Our objects listing is now a bit messy. I have never run the "Migrate Network Object Group Members" menu option in asdm. I see what it is going to do, I am not sure it really helps me clean old objects, it seems low risk, but when I walk up to execution, there are a lot of changes it wants to make. We always save backup configurations but, if there are "gotchas" I don't want to put the company in that position. What has been the communities, Cisco's experience? Thanks for any feedback. jc&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 12 Mar 2019 03:23:32 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/migrate-network-object-group-members-risk/m-p/2369315#M306521</guid>
      <dc:creator>john.cunningham</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2019-03-12T03:23:32Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Migrate network object group members; risk</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/migrate-network-object-group-members-risk/m-p/2369316#M306522</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;John,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;if you feel that is risky, you can always go for plan B.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;- you can take closure look at the object groups and decide new object naming convention policy.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;- from ASDM or CSM, you can see overlapped or duplicate rules, so you can start with reducing them &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;- you can see same services used in couple of rules with different service groups.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; - like object-group service WEB-PORTS tcp&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; port-object eq http&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; port-object eq https&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; object-group service APPLICATION-PORTS tcp&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; port-object eq http&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; port-object eq https&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; object-group service APPS-PORT tcp&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; port-object eq www&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; port-object eq https&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;- you can replace all these different object-group with one object group. like WEB-PORTS.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;- same way you can do excercise for network group as well.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;hope this helps.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;JD...&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 30 Dec 2013 18:38:56 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/migrate-network-object-group-members-risk/m-p/2369316#M306522</guid>
      <dc:creator>Jigar Dave</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2013-12-30T18:38:56Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

