<?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: PIX Multiple access-groups in Network Security</title>
    <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/pix-multiple-access-groups/m-p/1266455#M764929</link>
    <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;You should try &lt;B&gt;object-group&lt;/B&gt; and &lt;B&gt;remark&lt;/B&gt;.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Regards,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;jerry&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Tue, 20 Oct 2009 20:15:58 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Jerry Ye</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2009-10-20T20:15:58Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>PIX Multiple access-groups</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/pix-multiple-access-groups/m-p/1266452#M764926</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Can I have multiple access-groups (and multiple ACLs) protecting an interface on a PIX (ver 6.3(4)), for example: &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;access-group in-house-rules-acl in interface outside&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;access-group spam-drop-rules-acl in interface outside&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;If so, when a packet passes the first rule set, will it be evaluated by the second set of ACLs?&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 11 Mar 2019 16:28:17 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/pix-multiple-access-groups/m-p/1266452#M764926</guid>
      <dc:creator>ppauly</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2019-03-11T16:28:17Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: PIX Multiple access-groups</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/pix-multiple-access-groups/m-p/1266453#M764927</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Peter&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;No you can't. You can only apply one acl per direction altho on 6.3 i believe that can only be inbound.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Why do you need 2 acls, just combine them into one.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Jon&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 20 Oct 2009 15:23:50 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/pix-multiple-access-groups/m-p/1266453#M764927</guid>
      <dc:creator>Jon Marshall</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2009-10-20T15:23:50Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: PIX Multiple access-groups</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/pix-multiple-access-groups/m-p/1266454#M764928</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Ease of administration. &lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 20 Oct 2009 16:02:21 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/pix-multiple-access-groups/m-p/1266454#M764928</guid>
      <dc:creator>ppauly</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2009-10-20T16:02:21Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: PIX Multiple access-groups</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/pix-multiple-access-groups/m-p/1266455#M764929</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;You should try &lt;B&gt;object-group&lt;/B&gt; and &lt;B&gt;remark&lt;/B&gt;.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Regards,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;jerry&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 20 Oct 2009 20:15:58 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/pix-multiple-access-groups/m-p/1266455#M764929</guid>
      <dc:creator>Jerry Ye</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2009-10-20T20:15:58Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

