That's strange coz mine just keeps on throwing up that error message and I
cant get it to work.


On Tue, Dec 7, 2010 at 9:18 PM, wale ogunyemi <[email protected]>wrote:

> Here is my Configs from my Life ASA
> NibbsFire(config)# show run | inc TEST
> access-list TEST extended permit tcp host 10.10.10.10 host 1.1.1.1 eq
> telnet
> static (inside,outside) 10.3.3.3  access-list TEST
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Mark Senteza <[email protected]>
> *To:* wale ogunyemi <[email protected]>
> *Sent:* Wed, December 8, 2010 5:52:15 AM
>
> *Subject:* Re: [OSL | CCIE_Security] Policy NAT on ASA
>
> How did you get it to work ? I'm still getting the same error message
>
> access-list POLICY-NAT extended permit tcp host 10.1.1.1 host 10.3.3.3 eq
> telnet
> ASA(config)# static (inside,outside) 10.3.3.33 access-list POLICY-NAT
> ERROR: Protocol mismatch between the static and access-list
>
> On Tue, Dec 7, 2010 at 8:34 PM, wale ogunyemi <[email protected]>wrote:
>
>> You are actually right....but we can still restrict the access-list to
>> match only telnet traffic. and the use
>>
>> access-list POLICY-NAT permit tcp host 10.1.1.1 host 10.3.3.3 eq telnet
>> static ( inside,outside) 10.3.3.33 access-list POLICY-NAT
>> i justed tested it now and it worked.
>>
>> ------------------------------
>> *From:* Mark Senteza <[email protected]>
>> *To:* wale ogunyemi <[email protected]>
>> *Sent:* Wed, December 8, 2010 5:16:29 AM
>> *Subject:* Re: [OSL | CCIE_Security] Policy NAT on ASA
>>
>> Wale,
>>
>> I cant do it that way. I always get a "protocol mismatch" error message,
>> as follows:
>>
>> ASA(config)# access-list POLICY-NAT ext permit ip host 10.1.1.1 host
>> 10.3.3.3
>> ASA(config)# static (inside,outside) tcp 10.3.3.33 23 access-list
>> POLICY-NAT
>> ERROR: Protocol mismatch between the static and access-list
>>
>> Or when I try this
>>
>> ASA(config)# access-list POLICY-NAT ext permit tcp host 10.1.1.1 host
>> 10.3.3.3
>> ASA(config)# static (inside,outside) tcp 10.3.3.33 23 access-list
>> POLICY-NAT
>> ERROR: Missing local port in access-list used in static pat
>> ASA(config)#
>>
>> It seems if not given restrictions on how to configure it, then Option A
>> is always the way to go.
>>
>> Mark
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Dec 7, 2010 at 8:05 PM, wale ogunyemi 
>> <[email protected]>wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Option A is the best solution but if you are told not to use the nat and
>>> global command to achieve this then Option B will be used but you still
>>> have to specify the tcp keyword to be correct because the way you have
>>> used your access-list  will affect any other traffic other than telnet...the
>>> command set is will be like this
>>> static (inside,outside) tcp 192.168.6.61 23 access-list POLICY-NAT 23
>>> This should be more appropriate
>>> ------------------------------
>>> *From:* Mark Senteza <[email protected]>
>>> *To:* [email protected]
>>> *Sent:* Wed, December 8, 2010 12:23:37 AM
>>> *Subject:* [OSL | CCIE_Security] Policy NAT on ASA
>>>
>>> Hi again everyone.
>>>
>>> A question about Policy NAT on the ASA, and the best option to pick. With
>>> Policy NAT I can use either one of the following options:
>>>
>>> What I'm trying to accomplish is that from Router R1, when I telnet to
>>> Router R4's loopback0 (10.4.4.4) using the R1 loopback0 interface
>>> (10.1.1.1), I should get the address translated to 192.168.6.61. But if I
>>> telnet from any other interface, I should get translated to 192.168.6.62
>>>
>>> *Option A*
>>>
>>> access-list POLICY-NAT1 extended permit ip host 10.1.1.1 host 10.4.4.4 eq
>>> telnet
>>>
>>> access-list POLICY-NAT2 extended permit ip any host 10.4.4.4 eq telnet
>>>
>>> nat (inside) 1 access-list POLICY-NAT1
>>> global (outside) 1 192.168.6.61
>>>
>>> nat (inside) 2 access-list POLICY-NAT2
>>> global (outside) 2 192.168.6.62
>>>
>>>
>>> *Option B*
>>>
>>> access-list POLICY-NAT1 extended permit ip host 10.1.1.1 host 10.4.4.4
>>>
>>> access-list POLICY-NAT2 extended permit ip any host 10.4.4.4
>>>
>>> static (inside,outside) 192.168.6.61 access-list POLICY-NAT1
>>>
>>> static (inside,outside) 192.168.6.62 access-list POLICY-NAT2
>>>
>>>
>>> I use Option A because I can be specific with defining the traffic from
>>> source to host as telnet traffic. With Option B I cannot, and even though
>>> when I do telnet I get translated to the IP I'm requested to get translated
>>> to, I also get translated to that same IP for all over traffic coming from
>>> host 10.1.1.1 to host 10.4.4.4. The question only specifies telnet, not any
>>> other traffic, so I guess I could care or careless about what happens to it
>>> just as long as the traffic in question gets translated.
>>>
>>> If presented with a question like this in the lab, and not told to use
>>> one way or the other, would option A be the best solution to provide, seeing
>>> that its as specific as can possibly get ?
>>>
>>> Mark
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
_______________________________________________
For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit 
www.ipexpert.com

Reply via email to