03-31-2015 04:21 PM - edited 03-11-2019 10:43 PM
I have one device on a subnet that cannot reach some wireless anchor controllers in our DMZ. I've noticed some static statements that appear to me to dead end the address. I would appreciate some help figuring out why these commands are in our ASA as I have little experience.
static (inside,dmz_wifi) A.A.A.A A.A.A.A netmask 255.255.255.255
static (inside,icon) A.A.A.A A.A.A.A netmask 255.255.255.255
where A.A.A.A represents the same IP address in each case.
For example: static (inside,dmz_wifi) 192.168.7.7 192.168.7.7 netmask 255.255.255.255
I would appreciate any help you can provide.
Steve
03-31-2015 04:44 PM
Steve
By default traffic is not allowed from a lower security interface to a higher security interface without -
1) an acl allowing the traffic
and
2) if you have nat control enabled a static NAT statement for the inside IPs
what that statement is doing is presenting the internal IP of 192.168.7.7 to the dmz_wifi so that connections can be initiated from machines in the dmz_wifi to that IP address on the inside.
The reason it is the same IP is simply because you don't actually want to present it as a different IP but you still need a NAT statement for it.
It's called identity NAT.
So from your statements I assume that both the icon and dmz_wifi interfaces have a lower security level than the inside interface ?
Jon
03-31-2015 05:20 PM
Yes. Inside is 100, the other two are 20. If I understand this properly this rule will allow 192.168.7.7 to establish a connection to icon or dmz_wifi but not to any other interfaces nor will it allow something on those interfaces to establish a connection TO the address.
Interesting. Still seems like an unnecessary command for our purposes but I don't expect you to understand our environment without a lot more discussion. I'll take it up with some local talent tomorrow.
I appreciate your quick and thorough answer and your willingness to share your experience.
Steve
03-31-2015 05:25 PM
Steve
If I understand this properly this rule will allow 192.168.7.7 to establish a connection to icon or dmz_wifi but not to any other interfaces nor will it allow something on those interfaces to establish a connection TO the address.
Just to clarify the second part.
If you mean it won't allow connections from devices on other interfaces ie. not icon or wifi_dmz then yes correct.
But it will allow connections to be initiated from devices on the icon or wifi_dmz interfaces.
I think that is what you were saying, just wanted to be sure :-)
Jon
03-31-2015 06:43 PM
I didn't expect it to work both ways. I guess I'm as good as a weather forecaster - 50% right.
Thanks again.
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