cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
cancel
2646
Views
0
Helpful
2
Replies

Deleting Group object in ASA

mahesh18
Level 6
Level 6

Hi Everyone,

Fw1  has say object group subnet1

Fw1#sh run object-group id  subnet1

object-group network subnet1

group-object test

then i did

Fw1#sh run object-group id test

object-group network test

network-object 10.0.0.0 255.0.0.0

network-object 172.16.0.0 255.240.0.0

network-object 192.168.0.0 255.255.0.0

**************************************************************

Fw2#sh run object-group id subnet1

object-group network subnet1

network-object 10.0.0.0 255.0.0.0

network-object 192.168.0.0 255.255.0.0

network-object 172.16.0.0 255.240.0.0

Also Fw2 has

sh run object-group id test

object-group network test

network-object object 10.0.0.0

network-object object 172.16.0.0

network-object object 192.168.0.0

My question is if i add the  config below   to Fw2 

sh run object-group id subnet1

object-group network subnet1

group-object test

and then delete the below config from fw2

Fw2#sh run object-group id subnet1

object-group network subnet1

network-object 10.0.0.0 255.0.0.0

network-object 192.168.0.0 255.255.0.0

network-object 172.16.0.0 255.240.0.0

Will it make any difference in running config of fw2?

will it cause any outage?

Regards

Mahesh

1 Accepted Solution

Accepted Solutions

Jouni Forss
VIP Alumni
VIP Alumni

Hi,

So if I understood you correctly then you have

  • FW1 with an "object-group" configured that contains inside it another "object-group"
  • FW2 with an "object-group" with 3 "network-object" statements which you want to remove and replace with a similiar "object-group" as in FW1

If this is true then I guess this is a similiar thing that you asked before.

You would have to have this already on FW2 or configure this on the FW2

object-group network test

network-object object 10.0.0.0

network-object object 172.16.0.0

network-object object 192.168.0.0

You would then add this "object-group" under the other "object-group"

object-group network subnet1

group-object test

And while under the "object-group network subnet1" configuration space you would remove the "network-object" configuration lines

no network-object 10.0.0.0 255.0.0.0

no network-object 192.168.0.0 255.255.0.0

no network-object 172.16.0.0 255.240.0.0

With that order you should have the same subnets/networks under the "object-group" all the time. You SHOULD NOT remove the "subnet1" object though if its in use in an ACL I think the ASA wont even let you remove it.

Again if these are used only for interface ACLs then I imagine these changes wouldnt cause a problem. If they would be used for NAT then I am not so sure.

I personally am not a big fan of grouping objects under other objects. In the long run the configurations become hard to read.

- Jouni

View solution in original post

2 Replies 2

Jouni Forss
VIP Alumni
VIP Alumni

Hi,

So if I understood you correctly then you have

  • FW1 with an "object-group" configured that contains inside it another "object-group"
  • FW2 with an "object-group" with 3 "network-object" statements which you want to remove and replace with a similiar "object-group" as in FW1

If this is true then I guess this is a similiar thing that you asked before.

You would have to have this already on FW2 or configure this on the FW2

object-group network test

network-object object 10.0.0.0

network-object object 172.16.0.0

network-object object 192.168.0.0

You would then add this "object-group" under the other "object-group"

object-group network subnet1

group-object test

And while under the "object-group network subnet1" configuration space you would remove the "network-object" configuration lines

no network-object 10.0.0.0 255.0.0.0

no network-object 192.168.0.0 255.255.0.0

no network-object 172.16.0.0 255.240.0.0

With that order you should have the same subnets/networks under the "object-group" all the time. You SHOULD NOT remove the "subnet1" object though if its in use in an ACL I think the ASA wont even let you remove it.

Again if these are used only for interface ACLs then I imagine these changes wouldnt cause a problem. If they would be used for NAT then I am not so sure.

I personally am not a big fan of grouping objects under other objects. In the long run the configurations become hard to read.

- Jouni

Hi Jouni,

Yes you understood correctly.

Its always good to get advice from you.

Best regards

MAhesh

Getting Started

Find answers to your questions by entering keywords or phrases in the Search bar above. New here? Use these resources to familiarize yourself with the community:

Review Cisco Networking products for a $25 gift card