<?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 WCCP Failover in Network Security</title>
    <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/asa-wccp-failover/m-p/1966628#M410028</link>
    <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Lance, &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Same interface in this case means same instance of interface (as seen in "show nameif"). &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;You are also correct on the ACL issue. ACLs ARE processed before WCCP.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;IMG border="0" height="2" src="http://www.cisco.com/en/US/i/templates/blank.gif" style="color: #000000; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12px; text-indent: -24px; background-color: #ffffff;" width="19" /&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;PRE __jive_macro_name="quote" class="jive_text_macro jive_macro_quote"&gt;An ingress access list entry always takes higher priority over WCCP. For example, if an access list does not permit a client to communicate with a server, then traffic is not redirected to a cache engine. Both ingress interface access lists and egress interface access lists are applied.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;/PRE&gt;&lt;P&gt;But that actually helps you address a situation where users could access internet without WCCP present. &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;On the outside interface in egress direction you can DENY any tcp/80 traffic unless it's coming from one of the proxies.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Makes sense?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Marcin.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Fri, 03 Aug 2012 08:33:37 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Marcin Latosiewicz</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2012-08-03T08:33:37Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>ASA WCCP Failover</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/asa-wccp-failover/m-p/1966625#M410019</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Can someone help clarrify some things.&amp;nbsp; I read that WCCP is supposed to support failover.&amp;nbsp; I want to WCCP redirect some web traffic to a proxy.&amp;nbsp; If that proxy is not avvailable the I want to redirect it to another "backup" proxy but when looking at the WCCP settings in ASDM and the cli commands I dont see where yuo configure a second address to redirect to.&amp;nbsp; How does this failover actually work?&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 11 Mar 2019 23:37:24 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/asa-wccp-failover/m-p/1966625#M410019</guid>
      <dc:creator>lfkentwell</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2019-03-11T23:37:24Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>ASA WCCP Failover</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/asa-wccp-failover/m-p/1966626#M410023</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Lance, &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Proxy should register to ASA (or any WCCP "server") not the other way around. &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;That's why ASA's configuration is to create an ACL to allow registration from particular IPs:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;PRE __jive_macro_name="quote" class="jive_text_macro jive_macro_quote"&gt;&lt;P&gt;bsns-asa5520-2(config)# wccp web-cache ?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;configure mode commands/options:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp; group-list&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; Set the access-list used to permit group membership&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/PRE&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;You can have a look at WCCP at-a-glance operation on wikipedia:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;A class="jive-link-external-small" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_Cache_Communication_Protocol"&gt;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_Cache_Communication_Protocol&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;There are links to Cisco documentation later on there.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;You can have a look at the status of registration via:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;PRE __jive_macro_name="quote" class="jive_text_macro jive_macro_quote"&gt;show wccp [service-name-or-number] detail&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;/PRE&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hope that clears things up.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;If you're seeing problem with registering both proxys to ASA, open up a TAC case.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;A class="jive-link-external-small" href="http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/security/asa/asa84/configuration/guide/access_wccp.html#wp1101443"&gt;http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/security/asa/asa84/configuration/guide/access_wccp.html#wp1101443&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;supported:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;PRE __jive_macro_name="quote" class="jive_text_macro jive_macro_quote"&gt;&lt;P&gt;•&lt;IMG border="0" height="2" src="http://www.cisco.com/en/US/i/templates/blank.gif" style="color: #000000; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12px; text-indent: -24px; background-color: #ffffff;" width="19" /&gt;Multiple cache engines in a service group.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/PRE&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;M.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 02 Aug 2012 07:50:58 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/asa-wccp-failover/m-p/1966626#M410023</guid>
      <dc:creator>Marcin Latosiewicz</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2012-08-02T07:50:58Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>ASA WCCP Failover</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/asa-wccp-failover/m-p/1966627#M410026</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt; Great that explains it thanks.&amp;nbsp; From what im reading about ASA WCCP implemntation the client and the "proxy" have to both be reachable on the same interface as WCCP.&amp;nbsp; You cant redirect the request to a "proxy" that might be sitting on a DMZ of another interface, is that correct?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;In this case what if the "proxy" is on another vlan that is still on the same interface, is that ok?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;What if the "proxy" is on another subnet, maybe even a different location.&amp;nbsp; Is it still ok provided that is reached via the same interface the original request was recieved on?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Also one more thing I read that there has to be a rule permitting the traffic for WCCP to intercept it.&amp;nbsp; IS that correct?&amp;nbsp; So that would mean if I want to recirect all traffic from host A out to te internet then not only do I have to put an ACL in the WCCP to redirect traffic from that host but there must also be a rule saying Host A on ANY port has a permit tot he internet?&amp;nbsp; That seems risky to me, if your "proxy" goes down wont it just thne allow the traffic out?&amp;nbsp; I would not want that.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 02 Aug 2012 22:12:37 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/asa-wccp-failover/m-p/1966627#M410026</guid>
      <dc:creator>lfkentwell</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2012-08-02T22:12:37Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>ASA WCCP Failover</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/asa-wccp-failover/m-p/1966628#M410028</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Lance, &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Same interface in this case means same instance of interface (as seen in "show nameif"). &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;You are also correct on the ACL issue. ACLs ARE processed before WCCP.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;IMG border="0" height="2" src="http://www.cisco.com/en/US/i/templates/blank.gif" style="color: #000000; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12px; text-indent: -24px; background-color: #ffffff;" width="19" /&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;PRE __jive_macro_name="quote" class="jive_text_macro jive_macro_quote"&gt;An ingress access list entry always takes higher priority over WCCP. For example, if an access list does not permit a client to communicate with a server, then traffic is not redirected to a cache engine. Both ingress interface access lists and egress interface access lists are applied.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;/PRE&gt;&lt;P&gt;But that actually helps you address a situation where users could access internet without WCCP present. &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;On the outside interface in egress direction you can DENY any tcp/80 traffic unless it's coming from one of the proxies.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Makes sense?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Marcin.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 03 Aug 2012 08:33:37 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/asa-wccp-failover/m-p/1966628#M410028</guid>
      <dc:creator>Marcin Latosiewicz</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2012-08-03T08:33:37Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

