11-27-2013 07:19 AM - edited 03-11-2019 08:10 PM
Hello all, I have this question, probably pretty an easy to answer, but unfortunately I can't test it myself in a production environment right now.
Do you know if is possible to have in ASA 8.6 a Static NAT rule with multiple subnets in both object groups. I currently have one to one subnet translation, but I need to add another two subnets.
Today's configuration is this
*** FROM ONE SUBNET TO ANOTHER ***
object-group network REGIONAL-SOURCE
network-object 10.1.1.0 255.255.255.0
object-group network REGIONAL-NAT
network-object 10.1.201.0 255.255.255.0
nat (Outside,Inside) after-auto source static REGIONAL-SOURCE REGIONAL-NAT dns
What I need to accomplish is add two new subnets, but I want to see if is possible to do it using the same NAT rule, just adding the new 2 subnets.
10.1.2.0/24 natted to 10.1.202.0 255.255.255.0
10.1.3.0/24 natted to 10.1.203.0 255.255.255.0
*** TWO MORE SUBNETS ARE NEEDED ***
object-group network REGIONAL-SOURCE
network-object 10.1.2.0 255.255.255.0
network-object 10.1.3.0 255.255.255.0
object-group network REGIONAL-NAT
network-object 10.1.202.0 255.255.255.0
network-object 10.1.203.0 255.255.255.0
If this is not possible I understand separate objects should be created with individual nat, I appreciate your comments and help.
Solved! Go to Solution.
11-27-2013 07:34 AM
Hi,
This should be no problem. It should work as you have thought.
I tested the configurations on my own ASA
object-group network REGIONAL-SOURCE
network-object 10.1.1.0 255.255.255.0
network-object 10.1.2.0 255.255.255.0
network-object 10.1.3.0 255.255.255.0
object-group network REGIONAL-NAT
network-object 10.1.201.0 255.255.255.0
network-object 10.1.202.0 255.255.255.0
network-object 10.1.203.0 255.255.255.0
nat (LAN,WAN) source static REGIONAL-SOURCE REGIONAL-NAT
Here at the results of the "packet-tracer" to show the translations
ASA(config)# packet-tracer input LAN tcp 10.1.1.100 12345 7.7.7.7 80
Phase: 4
Type: NAT
Subtype:
Result: ALLOW
Config:
nat (LAN,WAN) source static REGIONAL-SOURCE REGIONAL-NAT
Additional Information:
Static translate 10.1.1.100/12345 to 10.1.201.100/12345
ASA(config)# packet-tracer input LAN tcp 10.1.2.100 12345 7.7.7.7 80
Phase: 4
Type: NAT
Subtype:
Result: ALLOW
Config:
nat (LAN,WAN) source static REGIONAL-SOURCE REGIONAL-NAT
Additional Information:
Static translate 10.1.2.100/12345 to 10.1.202.100/12345
ASA(config)# packet-tracer input LAN tcp 10.1.3.100 12345 7.7.7.7 80
Phase: 4
Type: NAT
Subtype:
Result: ALLOW
Config:
nat (LAN,WAN) source static REGIONAL-SOURCE REGIONAL-NAT
Additional Information:
Static translate 10.1.3.100/12345 to 10.1.203.100/12345
As you can see, everything is fine
Naturally take into consideration the fact that if you were to (for some reason) remove a "network-object" statement from some "object-group" then the operation of the "nat" would change even if you entered the removed "network-object" back. (unless you removed the last "network-object" inside the "object-group") This is because the order of the "network-object" inside the "object-group" would change. You would essentially have to recreate the "object-group" and "nat" configuration.
Hope this helps
Please do remember to mark a reply as the correct answer if it answered your question.
Feel free to ask more if needed
- Jouni
11-27-2013 07:59 AM
Also,
Just wanted to point out that naturally my "nat" configuration is a bit different. Its a Section 1 Manual NAT while your example is a Section 3 Manual NAT. (Because of the "after-auto" parameter in the command)
So there is a chance that the new source networks being added to the "nat" command through the "object-group" might have some existing "nat" rules that might override this new addition. You can naturally use the "packet-tracer" command to confirm that after the additions everything is matching to the correct "nat" rule. If not then you can naturally move the "nat" rule to a bit higher priority if rest of the configuration permits it.
- Jouni
11-27-2013 07:34 AM
Hi,
This should be no problem. It should work as you have thought.
I tested the configurations on my own ASA
object-group network REGIONAL-SOURCE
network-object 10.1.1.0 255.255.255.0
network-object 10.1.2.0 255.255.255.0
network-object 10.1.3.0 255.255.255.0
object-group network REGIONAL-NAT
network-object 10.1.201.0 255.255.255.0
network-object 10.1.202.0 255.255.255.0
network-object 10.1.203.0 255.255.255.0
nat (LAN,WAN) source static REGIONAL-SOURCE REGIONAL-NAT
Here at the results of the "packet-tracer" to show the translations
ASA(config)# packet-tracer input LAN tcp 10.1.1.100 12345 7.7.7.7 80
Phase: 4
Type: NAT
Subtype:
Result: ALLOW
Config:
nat (LAN,WAN) source static REGIONAL-SOURCE REGIONAL-NAT
Additional Information:
Static translate 10.1.1.100/12345 to 10.1.201.100/12345
ASA(config)# packet-tracer input LAN tcp 10.1.2.100 12345 7.7.7.7 80
Phase: 4
Type: NAT
Subtype:
Result: ALLOW
Config:
nat (LAN,WAN) source static REGIONAL-SOURCE REGIONAL-NAT
Additional Information:
Static translate 10.1.2.100/12345 to 10.1.202.100/12345
ASA(config)# packet-tracer input LAN tcp 10.1.3.100 12345 7.7.7.7 80
Phase: 4
Type: NAT
Subtype:
Result: ALLOW
Config:
nat (LAN,WAN) source static REGIONAL-SOURCE REGIONAL-NAT
Additional Information:
Static translate 10.1.3.100/12345 to 10.1.203.100/12345
As you can see, everything is fine
Naturally take into consideration the fact that if you were to (for some reason) remove a "network-object" statement from some "object-group" then the operation of the "nat" would change even if you entered the removed "network-object" back. (unless you removed the last "network-object" inside the "object-group") This is because the order of the "network-object" inside the "object-group" would change. You would essentially have to recreate the "object-group" and "nat" configuration.
Hope this helps
Please do remember to mark a reply as the correct answer if it answered your question.
Feel free to ask more if needed
- Jouni
11-27-2013 07:49 AM
Hi Jouni,
Thank you for your answer, I have a maintainance window next week, I will definitly mark "Correct answer" by next Wednesday if everything work as expected. I much appreciate your help on this matter.
11-27-2013 07:59 AM
Also,
Just wanted to point out that naturally my "nat" configuration is a bit different. Its a Section 1 Manual NAT while your example is a Section 3 Manual NAT. (Because of the "after-auto" parameter in the command)
So there is a chance that the new source networks being added to the "nat" command through the "object-group" might have some existing "nat" rules that might override this new addition. You can naturally use the "packet-tracer" command to confirm that after the additions everything is matching to the correct "nat" rule. If not then you can naturally move the "nat" rule to a bit higher priority if rest of the configuration permits it.
- Jouni
Discover and save your favorite ideas. Come back to expert answers, step-by-step guides, recent topics, and more.
New here? Get started with these tips. How to use Community New member guide