A coworker is trying to allow communication between two interfaces on his PIX525. To do this he created a NAT rule and an Access Rule. As soon as he creates the NAT rule, the Windows server he's trying to provide access to detects an IP conflict. It seems as if by creating the NAT rule, the PIX creates an instance of that IP address and Windows detects the conflict. Is there anything glaringly obvious we're doing wrong? The intent is to allow connections from a server in the dmz to a server on the internal interface. He's using ASDM, not CLI.
We found this, and seem to be adhering to it perfectly.... https://supportforums.cisco.com/t5/routing/no-translation-group-found-for-tcp-src/m-p/1355367/highlight/true#M129941
static(inside,outside) 159.105.###.20 159.105.###.20 is effectively what he has in place.
No comments:
Post a Comment