<?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: xlate table in Network Security</title>
    <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/xlate-table/m-p/1228537#M860758</link>
    <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;yes, I've been able to ping, trace etc from the firewall (FWSM) and/or the switch...its only when you are isolated to this particular VLAN..&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;It has to do with the translation of the 160.130.x.x address...but, i'm not sure why..here's my thinking.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I'm able to gain access to the 160.130.x.x when i put a static translation in, translating outside interface to inside (vlan) interface.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;However, this is the only interface (that I've discovered) that this is necessary for...There is another VLAN that accesses the same destination subnet, that doesnt require the translation statement...&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I know this is difficult to do without being able to post config information, but unfortunately, i'm not in a position to do so...&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I was hoping to just get some "thoughts" about potential reasons this translation statement would be necessary...&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;thanks&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Fri, 17 Apr 2009 10:12:18 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Bruce Summers</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2009-04-17T10:12:18Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>xlate table</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/xlate-table/m-p/1228533#M860745</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Can anybody point me in the right direction.  I'm running a PIX 535 v8.0.3..&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I'm attempting to connect from a specific VLAN (100) to a destination IP outside of our enclave (160.130.x.x).  from this VLAN, i'm performing telnet, trace, ping, etc ALL of which fail.  I perform the same (ping, telnet, etc..) to a different destination IP (159.160.x.x), from the same VLAN, taking the same route, and all attempts are successful.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I've looked at the ACL's and routes.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;The only thing I do note is that when &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;accessing the 159.130.x.x, a translation table entry is being created.  HOWEVER, when attempting connections to the 160.130.x.x, NO XLATE table is created.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I'm not entirely sure why that would be...I'm sure I havent explained this very well, or enough detail, but if you could give me some potential reasons I can research them further...&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;bruce&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 11 Mar 2019 15:19:55 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/xlate-table/m-p/1228533#M860745</guid>
      <dc:creator>Bruce Summers</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2019-03-11T15:19:55Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: xlate table</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/xlate-table/m-p/1228534#M860748</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Can you post access list and routes??&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 16 Apr 2009 22:08:25 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/xlate-table/m-p/1228534#M860748</guid>
      <dc:creator>lm20ele</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2009-04-16T22:08:25Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: xlate table</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/xlate-table/m-p/1228535#M860750</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;this is going to be sanitized, but it gives you the jist...&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;access-list inbound extended permit ip any any    &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;APPLIED to="" interface="" of="" vlan="" 100=""&gt;&lt;/APPLIED&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;route outside 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 X.X.X.1&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;routing to outside interface via interface VLAN 100 (x.x.x.1)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I entered a static translation for the 160.130.x.x advertising from the outside to VLAN100 and it began working...but, i'm not sure why...I dont think I should have to have that translation...&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 16 Apr 2009 23:13:26 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/xlate-table/m-p/1228535#M860750</guid>
      <dc:creator>Bruce Summers</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2009-04-16T23:13:26Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: xlate table</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/xlate-table/m-p/1228536#M860753</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hi Bruce,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Lets try to debug this way:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;First Try to ping, telnet, trace from your PIX to 160.130.x.x, if it works then you have to check ACL and NAT in PIX.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;But, if it doesn't work from the PIX itself then check the routes to that network or might ping/tracert is not allowed on that subnet.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 17 Apr 2009 02:41:13 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/xlate-table/m-p/1228536#M860753</guid>
      <dc:creator>roshan.maskey</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2009-04-17T02:41:13Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: xlate table</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/xlate-table/m-p/1228537#M860758</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;yes, I've been able to ping, trace etc from the firewall (FWSM) and/or the switch...its only when you are isolated to this particular VLAN..&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;It has to do with the translation of the 160.130.x.x address...but, i'm not sure why..here's my thinking.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I'm able to gain access to the 160.130.x.x when i put a static translation in, translating outside interface to inside (vlan) interface.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;However, this is the only interface (that I've discovered) that this is necessary for...There is another VLAN that accesses the same destination subnet, that doesnt require the translation statement...&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I know this is difficult to do without being able to post config information, but unfortunately, i'm not in a position to do so...&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I was hoping to just get some "thoughts" about potential reasons this translation statement would be necessary...&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;thanks&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 17 Apr 2009 10:12:18 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/xlate-table/m-p/1228537#M860758</guid>
      <dc:creator>Bruce Summers</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2009-04-17T10:12:18Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

