Cisco Support Community
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Announcements

Welcome to Cisco Support Community. We would love to have your feedback.

For an introduction to the new site, click here. If you'd prefer to explore, try our test area to get started. And see here for current known issues.

Bronze

FWSM - Statics between same security interfaces necessary?

I will have to implement a change which involves switching a single mode FWSM to multi mode.

Currently i have everything configured based on NAT0/NAT exemption which is going to be converted into static statements when doing the mode multi switch.

The only thing i am currently not sure about is if i need a static for same security level interfaces. Yes i know you only do statics from high to low interfaces but i just wanted to make sure that i don't have to prepare 4 pages of static rules before initiating the change.

Same security interfaces - static necessary? Please say NO. :)

Thanks for reading

Roble

  • Firewalling
1 ACCEPTED SOLUTION

Accepted Solutions
Hall of Fame Super Blue

Re: FWSM - Statics between same security interfaces necessary?

Roble

"Please say NO. :)"

Okay then, no you don't need statics :-). See attached link for confirmation -

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/security/fwsm/fwsm32/configuration/guide/cfgnat_f.html#wp1042673

Jon

2 REPLIES
Hall of Fame Super Blue

Re: FWSM - Statics between same security interfaces necessary?

Roble

"Please say NO. :)"

Okay then, no you don't need statics :-). See attached link for confirmation -

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/security/fwsm/fwsm32/configuration/guide/cfgnat_f.html#wp1042673

Jon

Bronze

Re: FWSM - Statics between same security interfaces necessary?

Hi Jon,

that was exactly what i was looking for. Thanks for pointing that out.

Roble

113
Views
0
Helpful
2
Replies
This widget could not be displayed.