<?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 Hello Karsten, in Network Security</title>
    <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/on-communication-over-inside-to-dmz-asa-5510/m-p/2795458#M415579</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;Hello Karsten,&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Thanks for the time and your response.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;inside to dmz - i think no acl required 100 to 25 security level&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;dmz to inside - we need acl bcoz the security level is higher on inside , what i taught. Can you confirm if statefull inspection works in this case eg 100 to 25 .&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Firewall version is above 8.4 .&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Snippet as per my understanding (Let me know if I'm correct or wrong)&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;-----------------&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;object network NAT-Source&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;host 192.168.7.10&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;object network NAT-Destination&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;host 192.168.107.10&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;nat (inside,dmz) source static NAT-Source NAT-Source destination static NAT-Destination NAT-Destination&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;-------------&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Thanks again.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Harish&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Tue, 26 Jan 2016 18:37:43 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>harishrajkv</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2016-01-26T18:37:43Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>On Communication over inside to dmz  ASA 5510</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/on-communication-over-inside-to-dmz-asa-5510/m-p/2795456#M415577</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hello All,&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;what all we required when&amp;nbsp; communicating from Inside(security level 100) to dmz (security level 25) both having private pools .&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;inside ip 192.168.7.10&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;dmz ip 192.168.107.10&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;service rdp .&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;I know we need to add ACL on DMZ-in apart from that do we need any nat configs ? if yes then why we need and what will be the syntax ?&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Thanks in advance.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;-&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Harish&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 21 Feb 2020 13:42:49 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/on-communication-over-inside-to-dmz-asa-5510/m-p/2795456#M415577</guid>
      <dc:creator>harishrajkv</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-02-21T13:42:49Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>As always: It depends ...</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/on-communication-over-inside-to-dmz-asa-5510/m-p/2795457#M415578</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;As always: It depends ...&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;OL&gt;
&lt;LI&gt;On the DMZ-interface you don't need any ACL. An ACL is only needed on the interface where the traffic is initiated.&amp;nbsp;If the Traffic is sent *to* the DMZ, then the return traffic is automatically allowed through statefull inspection.&lt;/LI&gt;
&lt;LI&gt;If you don't have any ACL on the inside interface, then you are done. Traffic from higher to lower security level is automatically allowed in this case.&lt;/LI&gt;
&lt;LI&gt;If there is an ACL on the inside interface, then add an ACE that allowes this traffic to the RDP-server in the DMZ.&lt;/LI&gt;
&lt;LI&gt;NAT is not needed&amp;nbsp;as you have full routing between inside and DMZ. But if all inside traffic is subject to NAT (as it was typically with ASA versions &amp;lt; 8.3) then you should&amp;nbsp;exempt this traffic from NAT.&lt;/LI&gt;
&lt;/OL&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 26 Jan 2016 17:55:12 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/on-communication-over-inside-to-dmz-asa-5510/m-p/2795457#M415578</guid>
      <dc:creator>Karsten Iwen</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2016-01-26T17:55:12Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Hello Karsten,</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/on-communication-over-inside-to-dmz-asa-5510/m-p/2795458#M415579</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hello Karsten,&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Thanks for the time and your response.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;inside to dmz - i think no acl required 100 to 25 security level&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;dmz to inside - we need acl bcoz the security level is higher on inside , what i taught. Can you confirm if statefull inspection works in this case eg 100 to 25 .&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Firewall version is above 8.4 .&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Snippet as per my understanding (Let me know if I'm correct or wrong)&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;-----------------&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;object network NAT-Source&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;host 192.168.7.10&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;object network NAT-Destination&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;host 192.168.107.10&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;nat (inside,dmz) source static NAT-Source NAT-Source destination static NAT-Destination NAT-Destination&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;-------------&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Thanks again.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Harish&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 26 Jan 2016 18:37:43 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/on-communication-over-inside-to-dmz-asa-5510/m-p/2795458#M415579</guid>
      <dc:creator>harishrajkv</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2016-01-26T18:37:43Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>The ASA is a statefull</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/on-communication-over-inside-to-dmz-asa-5510/m-p/2795459#M415580</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;The ASA is a statefull firewall. Allowing the return-traffic is the main purpose of a statefull firewall (in addition to other things).&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;And the NAT is probably not needed at all.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 26 Jan 2016 19:01:43 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/on-communication-over-inside-to-dmz-asa-5510/m-p/2795459#M415580</guid>
      <dc:creator>Karsten Iwen</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2016-01-26T19:01:43Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Thanks and i will definitely</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/on-communication-over-inside-to-dmz-asa-5510/m-p/2795460#M415581</link>
      <description>Thanks and i will definitely  get back to you with feedback when i get time working on this. 

-Harish</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 26 Jan 2016 19:38:50 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/on-communication-over-inside-to-dmz-asa-5510/m-p/2795460#M415581</guid>
      <dc:creator>harishrajkv</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2016-01-26T19:38:50Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Hello Karsten,</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/on-communication-over-inside-to-dmz-asa-5510/m-p/2795461#M415582</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hello Karsten,&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;I got the chance of working on the issue.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;There was no access-group called on inside interface and i allowed any traffic , it worked.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;NAT not required.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Thanks you&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;- Harish&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 27 Jan 2016 15:10:01 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/on-communication-over-inside-to-dmz-asa-5510/m-p/2795461#M415582</guid>
      <dc:creator>harishrajkv</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2016-01-27T15:10:01Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

