10-20-2009 01:03 PM - edited 03-11-2019 09:28 AM
We are moving from a pix to an asa
Our current pix implementation looks like this
static (inside,outside) 5.5.5.5 1.1.1.1 255.255.255.255
static (inside,outside) 6.6.6.6 1.1.1.1 255.255.255.255
When I try to do this on the asa I can only do a single instance and get the error
ERROR: duplicate of existing static
when I try to do the second.
Is there a switch I need to run or something to get this functionality to work? Or is there a better way to do this?
10-20-2009 01:43 PM
I think I found my own answer:
"
The simple answer is yes, but you can't using the "static" command as you would expect or else you'll get the error "ERROR: duplicate of existing static".
So the following configuration will fail;
static (Inside,Outside) 201.10.10.2 10.10.10.1 netmask 255.255.255.255
static (Inside,Outside) 100.20.30.3 10.10.10.1 netmask 255.255.255.255
However using policy NAT on the PIX/ASA using code 7.x and beyond (Tested on 8.x) the following will work.
access-list policy_1 extended permit ip host 10.10.10.1 any
access-list policy_2 extended permit ip host 10.10.10.1 any
static (Inside,Outside) 201.10.10.2 access-list policy_1
static (Inside,Outside) 100.20.30.3 access-list policy_2"
10-20-2009 04:24 PM
This is a policy NAT configuration. I'm almost positive you will see abnormalities, especially when originating outbound connections.
Your configuration is saying:
Traffic originating from 10.10.10.1 to ANY destination, policy NAT to 201.10.10.2 and 100.20.30.3. However, there's nothing to differentiate which translation should be used. I'm guessing outbound traffic will appear from whatever IP is currently in the state table.
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