Apologies if this has been addressed previously, I looked through the last 12 months of c-nsp threads and didn't see this mentioned.
There is some debate going on in my department over a particular implementation and the 5505's capability to handle multiple netblocks. A quick primer on the situation: Firewall IP: 1.2.3.4(publicly routable, but changing for cust privacy) Customer netblock: 5.6.7.0/26(it's publicly routable as well, I'm changing for sake of cust privacy) Customer NAT: 192.168.0.0/24 The /26 is statically routed to 1.2.3.4 from the router level, and the customer wants to run NAT for their internal devices(db servers, etc.). Our implementations guy states that the 5505 can't handle assigning 3+ netblocks because they can't run multiple contexts. My experience with the ASA firewalls is limited so I very well may be wrong, but I believe the 5505s should be able to handle multiple netblocks on the internal side of the firewall using something such as sub-interfaces or similar. Can anyone help explain why this is or isn't feasible? They don't need to be on the same physical interface necessarily, we can run them to separate physical interfaces because this customer is hairpinned behind a switch(and the servers are connected to said switch instead of the firewall directly) so port density isn't a big issue(to a point). We can assign a netblock to each internal port on the firewall if need be - which seems to be the best solution from what I'm uncovering - and that works as a reasonable alternative. It doesn't scale very well obviously, but I don't think this customer is going to chew through netblocks at a rate where this will be an issue. Network Engineer, JNCIS-M > 214-981-1954 (office) > 214-642-4075 (cell) > [email protected] http://www.speakeasy.net _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
