<?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 Re: ipsec access-list question in Network Security</title>
    <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/ipsec-access-list-question/m-p/1410981#M750664</link>
    <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;That would only match ESP traffic.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Tanveer Dewan&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;A href="mailto:tdeewan@cisco.com"&gt;tdeewan@cisco.com&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Mon, 15 Feb 2010 14:50:37 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Tanveer Deewan</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2010-02-15T14:50:37Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>ipsec access-list question</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/ipsec-access-list-question/m-p/1410980#M750653</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;hello,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;i was configuring an access-list on a FWSM and came across an option which i think might help me reduce the number of access-list statements.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;access-list xxxxx extended permit &lt;STRONG&gt;ipsec a.a.a.a a.a.a.a&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;could some one tell me if the ipsec option in the access-list dynamically allow all the ports associated with ipsec connection like ESP, udp 500 or udp 4500 ?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;if not than what will it allow.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;we are having issues with ipsec-pass-thorugh on the fwsm as it does not support the default inspect statement like an ASA.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Aqdas&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 11 Mar 2019 16:59:48 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/ipsec-access-list-question/m-p/1410980#M750653</guid>
      <dc:creator>Aqdas Muneer</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2019-03-11T16:59:48Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: ipsec access-list question</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/ipsec-access-list-question/m-p/1410981#M750664</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;That would only match ESP traffic.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Tanveer Dewan&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;A href="mailto:tdeewan@cisco.com"&gt;tdeewan@cisco.com&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 15 Feb 2010 14:50:37 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/ipsec-access-list-question/m-p/1410981#M750664</guid>
      <dc:creator>Tanveer Deewan</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2010-02-15T14:50:37Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: ipsec access-list question</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/ipsec-access-list-question/m-p/1410982#M750694</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;any particular reason why we would use ipsec because protocol esp is also an option when configuring an access-list?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 08 Mar 2010 15:08:36 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/ipsec-access-list-question/m-p/1410982#M750694</guid>
      <dc:creator>Aqdas Muneer</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2010-03-08T15:08:36Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

