<?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 Pat translation rules in Network Security</title>
    <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/pat-translation-rules/m-p/1371237#M797220</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;I have a strange problem with some NAT rules.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Cisco Adaptive Security Appliance Software Version 8.0(5)9 &lt;BR /&gt; Device Manager Version 6.2(5)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;We have a machine which is connected in a DMZ and then external clients talk to the machine.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Due to historical reasons most of the clients talk to the machine on port 13002. However internally this is translated according to the source address to a different port number.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;This is currently running on a watchguard firewall and works correctly.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;We have tried programming this onto a cisco firewall and are coming up with some difficulties.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;A static policy nat has been created using the source as the internal address of the machine, and the destination as the external addresses that we are dealing with. It translates to the REAL address of the machine and then pats to the new port number.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;This works fine with the first one we put in - doing a packet trace reveals all the addresses and ports being translated correctly.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;The problem occurs when we add the second set into this. For this set we just change the destination and the port number.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;The firewall accepts the rule with a warning and everything looks fine.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;However when you test the rule the port is always translated to the port specified in the first section and not the one requested.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;The screenshot below (large) shows the rules and a packet trace to an address in the set2 group.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Any suggestions....&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Giles Cooper&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Mon, 11 Mar 2019 17:18:52 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>bgl-group</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2019-03-11T17:18:52Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Pat translation rules</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/pat-translation-rules/m-p/1371237#M797220</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;I have a strange problem with some NAT rules.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Cisco Adaptive Security Appliance Software Version 8.0(5)9 &lt;BR /&gt; Device Manager Version 6.2(5)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;We have a machine which is connected in a DMZ and then external clients talk to the machine.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Due to historical reasons most of the clients talk to the machine on port 13002. However internally this is translated according to the source address to a different port number.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;This is currently running on a watchguard firewall and works correctly.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;We have tried programming this onto a cisco firewall and are coming up with some difficulties.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;A static policy nat has been created using the source as the internal address of the machine, and the destination as the external addresses that we are dealing with. It translates to the REAL address of the machine and then pats to the new port number.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;This works fine with the first one we put in - doing a packet trace reveals all the addresses and ports being translated correctly.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;The problem occurs when we add the second set into this. For this set we just change the destination and the port number.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;The firewall accepts the rule with a warning and everything looks fine.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;However when you test the rule the port is always translated to the port specified in the first section and not the one requested.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;The screenshot below (large) shows the rules and a packet trace to an address in the set2 group.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Any suggestions....&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Giles Cooper&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 11 Mar 2019 17:18:52 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/pat-translation-rules/m-p/1371237#M797220</guid>
      <dc:creator>bgl-group</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2019-03-11T17:18:52Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Pat translation rules</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/pat-translation-rules/m-p/1371238#M797227</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hi,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;can you paste the ACL and NAT configuration related to this issue.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Regards&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Karuppu&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 09 Mar 2010 11:58:55 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/pat-translation-rules/m-p/1371238#M797227</guid>
      <dc:creator>KARUPPUCHAMY MALAIYANDI</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2010-03-09T11:58:55Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Pat translation rules</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/pat-translation-rules/m-p/1371239#M797236</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Extract of config as requested.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;object-group network orion_nat_15&lt;BR /&gt; network-object 194.216.175.247 255.255.255.255&lt;BR /&gt;object-group network orion_nat_17&lt;BR /&gt; network-object 194.216.175.248 255.255.255.255&lt;BR /&gt;object-group network LIVEEXAG_gocompare_set1&lt;BR /&gt; network-object 78.136.23.85 255.255.255.255&lt;BR /&gt; &lt;BR /&gt;object-group network LIVEEXAG_gocompare_set2&lt;BR /&gt; description There are two sets of IPs for gocompare used on different rule sets.......&lt;BR /&gt; network-object 67.192.226.38 255.255.255.255&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;static (DMZ,External) tcp 194.216.175.247 13002 access-list DMZ_nat_static_1&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;access-list CSM_FW_ACL_External extended permit tcp object-group LIVEEXAG_gocompare_set1 object-group orion_nat_15 eq 13002 &lt;BR /&gt;access-list CSM_FW_ACL_External extended permit tcp object-group LIVEEXAG_gocompare_set2 object-group orion_nat_15 eq 13002&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;access-list CSM_FW_ACL_External extended permit tcp object-group LIVEEXAG_gocompare_set1 object-group orion_nat_15 eq 13202 &lt;BR /&gt;access-list CSM_FW_ACL_External extended permit tcp object-group LIVEEXAG_gocompare_set2 object-group orion_nat_15 eq 13202&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;access-list DMZ_nat_static_1 extended permit tcp host 172.20.0.15 eq 13102 object-group LIVEEXAG_gocompare_set1 &lt;BR /&gt;access-list DMZ_nat_static_1 extended permit tcp host 172.20.0.15 eq 13202 object-group LIVEEXAG_gocompare_set2&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 09 Mar 2010 13:16:56 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/pat-translation-rules/m-p/1371239#M797236</guid>
      <dc:creator>bgl-group</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2010-03-09T13:16:56Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Pat translation rules</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/pat-translation-rules/m-p/1371240#M797281</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;This is working as designed. The warning message you saw is correct.&amp;nbsp; This is overlapping.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Which ever one hits first and continues to see traffic is the one that will work. The other will break.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;This is the same as doing the following: overlapping.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;static (DMZ,External) tcp 194.216.175.247 13002 172.20.0.15 13102&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;static (DMZ,External) tcp 194.216.175.247 13002 172.20.0.15 13202&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;-KS&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 09 Mar 2010 13:44:11 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/pat-translation-rules/m-p/1371240#M797281</guid>
      <dc:creator>Kureli Sankar</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2010-03-09T13:44:11Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

