topic Re: PIX IP address assignment problem version 6.3(4) in Network Security

PIX IP address assignment problem version 6.3(4)

g.yiannibas — Mon, 11 Mar 2019 11:26:23 GMT

Hello,

From which PIX OS version is it possible to assign a /31 address mask to an interface? In version 6.3(4) if I try to assign an IP with subnet mask 255.255.255.254 I get the error:

"Warning : IP and subnetmask form invalid pair indicating broadcast address"

I have seen a /31 mask assigned in PIX OS version 7.0 so I know it is possible. Anyone ever used one in version 6.XX ? I really need to use a /31 address because we have exhausted our company's public IPs.

Re: PIX IP address assignment problem version 6.3(4)

noran01 — Wed, 17 Oct 2007 12:55:19 GMT

I would have to think it is not available on the 6.x line of PIX OS due to the fact it wasn't available in the IOS version until 12.2(28)SB.

http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/software/ios122/122newft/122t/122t2/ft31addr.htm

Re: PIX IP address assignment problem version 6.3(4)

acomiskey — Wed, 17 Oct 2007 13:28:01 GMT

What address are you trying to enter?

Re: PIX IP address assignment problem version 6.3(4)

g.yiannibas — Thu, 18 Oct 2007 09:02:00 GMT

Hello,

My addressing is:

xxx.xxx.xxx.228 255.255.255.254 Router

xxx.xxx.xxx.229 255.255.255.254 PIX

I am aware of the IOS feature being available from version 12.2 onwards. I just could not find any documentation about PIX OS. There is an indirect reference to this limitation in Management Center for Firewalls ver 1.3.2 (part of the CiscoWorks VPN suite):

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/sw/cscowork/ps3992/products_user_guide_chapter09186a008028ab13.html#wp3649658

However the documentation of Management Center for Firewalls itself states that it supports PIX OS versions up to 6.3.3:

http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/rtrmgmt/cw2000/mgt_pix/fwmc_1_3/px_sd_13.htm#wp11866

So there is no definite answer about versions 6.3.4 and 6.3.5. I already verified that in version 6.3.4 /31 netmasks are not supported so my guess is that most probably they are not supported also in version 6.3.5

Thank you for your help, anyway.