<?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 5505 adding new ace in Network Security</title>
    <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/asa-5505-adding-new-ace/m-p/1635971#M558808</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="background-color: #f8fafd;"&gt;I'm new in cisco. I have an asa 5505 and I would like to adding a new rule for a network, however it was added, it seems it would be inactive. I have two inside network, &lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="background-color: #f8fafd;"&gt;192.168.12.0/24 (name: lanA) and 192.168.99.0/24. (name: lanB) I have the following in the running-config:&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="background-color: #f8fafd;"&gt;access-list lanB_acl line 1 extended permit ip 192.168.99.0 255.255.255.0 any&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="background-color: #f8fafd;"&gt;access-group lanB_acl in interface lanB_interface&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="background-color: #f8fafd;"&gt;But when I tried to reach a host in the lanA, the packets are dropped. I configure the asdm, which shows this on the LanB interface:&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="background-color: #f8fafd;"&gt;1 lanB_network | any | ip | permit (hits 344)&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="background-color: #f8fafd;"&gt;2 any | any | ip | deny&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="background-color: #f8fafd;"&gt;and I checked the packet tracer with: tcp, source: 192.168.99.57:10460 dest: 192.168.12.2:443&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="background-color: #f8fafd;"&gt;and it shows that the packet has been dropped by the last 2. 'implicit any any ip deny' rule, in spite of my access-list rule (access-list lanB_acl line 1 extended permit ip 192.168.99.0 255.255.255.0 any) preceded it, and active.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="background-color: #f8fafd;"&gt;The lanB and lanA interfaces are the same security level 100, and I can reach the outside/internet from 192.168.99.57&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="background-color: #f8fafd;"&gt;Is it possible that I have to reload the rules or something like in order to apply? Or I missconfigured something?&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="background-color: #f8fafd;"&gt;Could you give me some advices?&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="background-color: #f8fafd;"&gt;thank you very much&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="background-color: #f8fafd;"&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Mon, 11 Mar 2019 20:15:12 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>marypoppins</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2019-03-11T20:15:12Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>asa 5505 adding new ace</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/asa-5505-adding-new-ace/m-p/1635971#M558808</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="background-color: #f8fafd;"&gt;I'm new in cisco. I have an asa 5505 and I would like to adding a new rule for a network, however it was added, it seems it would be inactive. I have two inside network, &lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="background-color: #f8fafd;"&gt;192.168.12.0/24 (name: lanA) and 192.168.99.0/24. (name: lanB) I have the following in the running-config:&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="background-color: #f8fafd;"&gt;access-list lanB_acl line 1 extended permit ip 192.168.99.0 255.255.255.0 any&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="background-color: #f8fafd;"&gt;access-group lanB_acl in interface lanB_interface&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="background-color: #f8fafd;"&gt;But when I tried to reach a host in the lanA, the packets are dropped. I configure the asdm, which shows this on the LanB interface:&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="background-color: #f8fafd;"&gt;1 lanB_network | any | ip | permit (hits 344)&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="background-color: #f8fafd;"&gt;2 any | any | ip | deny&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="background-color: #f8fafd;"&gt;and I checked the packet tracer with: tcp, source: 192.168.99.57:10460 dest: 192.168.12.2:443&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="background-color: #f8fafd;"&gt;and it shows that the packet has been dropped by the last 2. 'implicit any any ip deny' rule, in spite of my access-list rule (access-list lanB_acl line 1 extended permit ip 192.168.99.0 255.255.255.0 any) preceded it, and active.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="background-color: #f8fafd;"&gt;The lanB and lanA interfaces are the same security level 100, and I can reach the outside/internet from 192.168.99.57&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="background-color: #f8fafd;"&gt;Is it possible that I have to reload the rules or something like in order to apply? Or I missconfigured something?&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="background-color: #f8fafd;"&gt;Could you give me some advices?&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="background-color: #f8fafd;"&gt;thank you very much&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="background-color: #f8fafd;"&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 11 Mar 2019 20:15:12 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/asa-5505-adding-new-ace/m-p/1635971#M558808</guid>
      <dc:creator>marypoppins</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2019-03-11T20:15:12Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: asa 5505 adding new ace</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/asa-5505-adding-new-ace/m-p/1635972#M558812</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hi&amp;nbsp; Chris,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Please try putting the following command in config mode:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;same-security-traffic permit inter-interface&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;If it still doesn't work, then if possible, please put a sanitized version of your config here, and I will try to see if anything is missing.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;-Shrikant&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-size: 8pt;"&gt;PS: Please mark the question as resolved if it is answered. Do rate helpful posts. Thanks.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 31 Mar 2011 20:56:40 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/asa-5505-adding-new-ace/m-p/1635972#M558812</guid>
      <dc:creator>Shrikant Sundaresh</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2011-03-31T20:56:40Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: asa 5505 adding new ace</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/asa-5505-adding-new-ace/m-p/1635973#M558817</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;THank you for your answer. I rather changed the security for the interface, because there are two other same security interface, which I don't want to bother. I use my computer in the management network with 192.168.99.50 and I would like to reach the mainoffice (192.168.12.0/24) and the other office lan (192.168.10.0/24) without any restriction. The interface I changed was the vlan12, its security was 100 just as the vlan99, and I lowered to 95.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;The real story is the following:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I inherited an asa, which has an outside interface ppoe and vlan2, and an inside interface which sharing among vlan12, vlan10, vlan99, vlan11, and vlan20. The networks:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;vlan10 =&amp;gt; 192.168.10.0/24 security 90&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;vlan12 =&amp;gt; 192.168.12.0/24 security 95&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;vlan99 =&amp;gt; 192.168.99.0/24 security 100&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;the others are irrelevant. The running-config is:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;interface Vlan2&lt;BR /&gt; description --Internet--&lt;BR /&gt; nameif outside&lt;BR /&gt; security-level 0&lt;BR /&gt; ip address pppoe setroute&lt;BR /&gt;!&lt;BR /&gt;interface Vlan10&lt;BR /&gt; description --otheroffice--&lt;BR /&gt; nameif otheroffice&lt;BR /&gt; security-level 90&lt;BR /&gt; ip address 192.168.10.1 255.255.255.0&lt;BR /&gt;!&lt;BR /&gt;interface Vlan11&lt;BR /&gt; description --otherlan--&lt;BR /&gt; nameif otherlan&lt;BR /&gt; security-level 90&lt;BR /&gt; ip address 192.168.11.1 255.255.255.0&lt;BR /&gt;!&lt;BR /&gt;interface Vlan12&lt;BR /&gt; description --mainoffice--&lt;BR /&gt; nameif mainoffice&lt;BR /&gt; security-level 95&lt;BR /&gt; ip address 192.168.12.1 255.255.255.0&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;!&lt;BR /&gt;interface Vlan99&lt;BR /&gt; description --Management--&lt;BR /&gt; nameif management&lt;BR /&gt; security-level 100&lt;BR /&gt; ip address 192.168.99.1 255.255.255.0&lt;BR /&gt;!&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;object-group service out_service&lt;BR /&gt; service-object tcp eq www&lt;BR /&gt; service-object tcp eq https&lt;BR /&gt; service-object tcp eq ssh&lt;BR /&gt; service-object tcp eq ftp&lt;BR /&gt; service-object udp eq domain&lt;BR /&gt;access-list nonat_management extended permit ip 192.168.99.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.99.0 255.255.255.0&lt;BR /&gt;access-list nonat_management extended permit ip 192.168.99.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.10.0 255.255.255.0 ( I added this in order to reach the other office lan)&lt;BR /&gt;access-list nonat_management extended permit ip 192.168.99.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.12.0 255.255.255.0 ( I added this in order to reach the main office lan)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;access-list nonat_otherlan extended permit ip 192.168.11.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.11.0 255.255.255.0&lt;BR /&gt;access-list nonat_otherlan extended permit ip 192.168.11.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.12.0 255.255.255.0&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;access-list acl_outside extended permit tcp any any eq 8080&lt;BR /&gt;access-list acl_outside extended permit tcp any any eq 3389&lt;BR /&gt;access-list acl_outside extended permit tcp any any eq 4080&lt;BR /&gt;access-list acl_outside extended permit tcp any any eq 4443&lt;BR /&gt;access-list acl_outside extended permit tcp any any eq 5080&lt;BR /&gt;access-list acl_outside extended permit tcp any any eq 5443&lt;BR /&gt;access-list acl_outside extended permit tcp any any eq 4800&lt;BR /&gt;access-list acl_outside extended permit tcp any any eq 5800&lt;BR /&gt;access-list acl_outside extended permit tcp any any eq 8888&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;access-list acl_otheroffice extended permit tcp host 192.168.10.199 host 192.168.12.11 eq 9100&lt;BR /&gt;access-list acl_otheroffice extended permit udp host 192.168.10.199 host 192.168.12.11 eq snmp&lt;BR /&gt;access-list acl_otheroffice extended deny ip 192.168.10.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.0.0 255.255.0.0&lt;BR /&gt;access-list acl_otheroffice extended permit object-group out_service 192.168.10.0 255.255.255.0 any &lt;BR /&gt;access-list nonat_mainofficeextended permit ip 192.168.12.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.10.0 255.255.255.0&lt;BR /&gt;access-list nonat_mainofficeextended permit ip 192.168.12.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.11.0 255.255.255.0&lt;BR /&gt;access-list nonat_mainofficeextended permit ip 192.168.12.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.99.0 255.255.255.0&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;nat-control&lt;BR /&gt;global (outside) 1 interface&lt;BR /&gt;nat (otheroffice) 1 192.168.10.0 255.255.255.0&lt;BR /&gt;nat (otherlan) 0 access-list nonat_otherlan &lt;BR /&gt;nat (mainoffice) 0 access-list nonat_buno&lt;BR /&gt;nat (mainoffice) 1 192.168.12.0 255.255.255.0&lt;BR /&gt;nat (management) 0 access-list nonat_management&lt;BR /&gt;nat (management) 1 192.168.99.10 255.255.255.255&lt;BR /&gt;nat (management) 1 192.168.99.0 255.255.255.0&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;static (otheroffice,outside) tcp interface 8080 192.168.10.200 8080 netmask 255.255.255.255&lt;BR /&gt;static (otheroffice,outside) tcp interface 3389 192.168.10.199 3389 netmask 255.255.255.255&lt;BR /&gt;static (office,outside) tcp interface 4080 192.168.12.14 www netmask 255.255.255.255&lt;BR /&gt;static (office,outside) tcp interface 4443 192.168.12.14 https netmask 255.255.255.255&lt;BR /&gt;static (office,outside) tcp interface 5080 192.168.12.15 www netmask 255.255.255.255&lt;BR /&gt;static (office,outside) tcp interface 5443 192.168.12.15 https netmask 255.255.255.255&lt;BR /&gt;static (office,outside) tcp interface 4800 192.168.12.14 8000 netmask 255.255.255.255&lt;BR /&gt;static (office,outside) tcp interface 5800 192.168.12.15 8000 netmask 255.255.255.255&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;access-group acl_outside in interface outside&lt;BR /&gt;access-group acl_otheroffice in interface ucs&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;There is not any rule attached to the management iterface with access-group.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I use my computer in the management network with 192.168.99.50 and I would like to reach the mainoffice (192.168.12.0/24) and the other office lan (192.168.10.0/24) without any restriction. So I added the following two lines to the config:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;access-list nonat_management extended permit ip 192.168.99.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.10.0 255.255.255.0&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;access-list nonat_management extended permit ip 192.168.99.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.12.0 255.255.255.0&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Now it seems that some services work, but some not. For example I can reach the 192.168.10.199 pc via vnc, but I can't reach the shares for the the same pc. On the other network I can't reach the 192.168.12.12 printer, and I can't reach the computer shares, however I can reach shares of a freenas, which ip is 192.168.12.2.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I don't understand why.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;In addition to this, is there any sense of the two lines? Or is it enough the second one?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;nat (management) 1 192.168.99.10 255.255.255.255&lt;BR /&gt;nat (management) 1 192.168.99.0 255.255.255.0&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thank you very much&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 04 Apr 2011 11:57:26 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/asa-5505-adding-new-ace/m-p/1635973#M558817</guid>
      <dc:creator>marypoppins</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2011-04-04T11:57:26Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: asa 5505 adding new ace</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/asa-5505-adding-new-ace/m-p/1635974#M558820</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hi Chris,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;In the NAT order of operations NAT exempt (nat 0) has the highest priority.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Since you have nat (management) 0 access-list ____, the two nat (management) 1 will never be hit. So you could actually remove both. (unless of course you need to go to one of the subnets not mentioned in the no-nat access-list).&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;You could try to run the packet-tracer command on the ASA for everything that is failing and try to figure out why.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;The command is like this:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;(to test ping): packet-tracer input &lt;INTERFACE-NAME&gt; icmp &lt;SOURCE ip=""&gt; 8 0 &lt;DEST ip=""&gt; det&lt;/DEST&gt;&lt;/SOURCE&gt;&lt;/INTERFACE-NAME&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;(to test connection): packet-tracer input &lt;INTERFACE-NAME&gt; tcp/udp &lt;SOURCE ip=""&gt; &lt;SRC port=""&gt; &lt;DEST ip=""&gt; &lt;DEST port=""&gt; det&lt;/DEST&gt;&lt;/DEST&gt;&lt;/SRC&gt;&lt;/SOURCE&gt;&lt;/INTERFACE-NAME&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;interface-name is the interface on which the packet would first hit.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Please post the packet-tracers (or attach it if there are too many or too big) in case you need help in figuring them out.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;-Shrikant&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 04 Apr 2011 12:27:49 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/asa-5505-adding-new-ace/m-p/1635974#M558820</guid>
      <dc:creator>Shrikant Sundaresh</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2011-04-04T12:27:49Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: asa 5505 adding new ace</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/asa-5505-adding-new-ace/m-p/1635975#M558821</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="background-color: #f8fafd;"&gt;Sorry for the delay, and thank you very much for your kind.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="background-color: #f8fafd;"&gt;The rule I added is fine, however I can't reach the windows shares, because of the client firewall onlly permit only the local lan. So I tried to reach the 192.168.12.x subnet from the 192.168.99.x subnet without nat. I tried to change temporarly the windows' rule, and it worked. I don't want to change the firewall rules on all my clients, which is not the best way I think. Rather I should use nat. &lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="background-color: #f8fafd;"&gt;So I have to remove this lines:&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="background-color: #f8fafd;"&gt;access-list nonat_management extended permit ip 192.168.99.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.12.0 255.255.255.0 ( I added this in order to reach the main office lan)&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;access-list nonat_management extended permit ip 192.168.99.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.12.0 255.255.255.0 ( I added this in order to reach the main office lan)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="background-color: #f8fafd;"&gt;And make tthese to reach the mainoffice and otheroffice&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="background-color: #f8fafd;"&gt;access-list nat_management_to_mainoffice extended permit ip 192.168.99.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.12.0 255.255.255.0&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="background-color: #f8fafd;"&gt;access-list nat_management_to_otheroffice&amp;nbsp; extended permit ip 192.168.99.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.10.0 255.255.255.0&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;global (mainoffice) 5 interface (&amp;lt;-this will use the mainoffice interface address)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;global (otheroffice) 10 interface (&amp;lt;-this will use the otheroffice interface address)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;nat (management) 5 access-list &lt;SPAN style="background-color: #f8fafd;"&gt;nat_management_to_mainoffice&amp;nbsp; (if packages travel from 99.x to 12.x then use global nat id 5)&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;nat (management) 10 access-list &lt;SPAN style="background-color: #f8fafd;"&gt;nat_management_to_otheroffice (if packages travel from 99.x to 10.x then use global nat id 10)&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="background-color: #f8fafd;"&gt;I don't know if I have to bind the access list to the management interface with the access-group command, because there are other rules that don't use access-group command.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="background-color: #f8fafd;"&gt;Am I right?&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="background-color: #f8fafd;"&gt;Thank you&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 11 Apr 2011 15:36:20 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/asa-5505-adding-new-ace/m-p/1635975#M558821</guid>
      <dc:creator>marypoppins</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2011-04-11T15:36:20Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: asa 5505 adding new ace</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/asa-5505-adding-new-ace/m-p/1635976#M558822</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hi Chris,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;You are absolutely correct. I think on removing the access-list nonat_management, this nat rule would also be removed:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;nat (management) 0 access-list nonat_management&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Just verify that this nat rule does not exist. Other than that, the configuration you have done is absolutely correct, and should work fine.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;-Shrikant&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;P.S.: Please mark the question resolved, if it has been answered. Do rate helpful posts. Thanks.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 11 Apr 2011 16:08:20 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/asa-5505-adding-new-ace/m-p/1635976#M558822</guid>
      <dc:creator>Shrikant Sundaresh</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2011-04-11T16:08:20Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: asa 5505 adding new ace</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/asa-5505-adding-new-ace/m-p/1635977#M558824</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thank you very much!&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;It works!&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I have a question. I don't understand why don't I have to use access-group command to bind this access-list to an interface?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 12 Apr 2011 10:58:27 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/asa-5505-adding-new-ace/m-p/1635977#M558824</guid>
      <dc:creator>marypoppins</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2011-04-12T10:58:27Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: asa 5505 adding new ace</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/asa-5505-adding-new-ace/m-p/1635978#M558828</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hey Chris,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;The access-list we have created is used to match traffic that requires NAT exemption, rather than control traffic on the interface.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;When we use the access-group command for an access-list, the purpose is to regulate flow of traffic on the interface.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hope this clarifies your doubt. &lt;SPAN __jive_emoticon_name="happy" __jive_macro_name="emoticon" class="jive_macro jive_emote" src="https://community.cisco.com/images/emoticons/happy.gif"&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;-Shrikant&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;P.S.: Please mark the question as answered, if it has been resolved. Do rate helpful posts. Thanks.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 12 Apr 2011 11:14:50 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/asa-5505-adding-new-ace/m-p/1635978#M558828</guid>
      <dc:creator>Shrikant Sundaresh</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2011-04-12T11:14:50Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: asa 5505 adding new ace</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/asa-5505-adding-new-ace/m-p/1635979#M558830</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;I didn't understand how the packet can travel through the asa, if I don't use any rule binding to the interface. But I think this is because of the inner rules, which enable the travelling from higher sevurity interface to lower ones.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I am right?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thank you very much again.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 13 Apr 2011 07:03:58 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/asa-5505-adding-new-ace/m-p/1635979#M558830</guid>
      <dc:creator>marypoppins</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2011-04-13T07:03:58Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: asa 5505 adding new ace</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/asa-5505-adding-new-ace/m-p/1635980#M558832</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hi Chris,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;You are correct. By default, there are 2 access rules on the interface.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;1. permit traffic to other interfaces which have lowere security level than this interface&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;2. deny ip any any&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;So when travelling from inside to outside, traffic matches the first rule and heads out. Thus you don't need any access list to be applied on the inside interface.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hope this helps.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;-Shrikant&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 13 Apr 2011 10:17:54 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/asa-5505-adding-new-ace/m-p/1635980#M558832</guid>
      <dc:creator>Shrikant Sundaresh</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2011-04-13T10:17:54Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

