Re: ISA 2006 web proxy scenario
- From: guardian911@xxxxxxxxx
- Date: 15 May 2007 12:48:58 -0700
On May 15, 10:43 am, "Phillip Windell" <philwind...@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
<guardian...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1179243760.897961.271050@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
I have the followingISA2006 configuration: 4ISA2006 Standard
Editions servers, each with 2 NICs (External and Internal) in
workgroup mode. The 4 servers are in 2 separate DMZ's - see below.
Internet->PIX-> ISA2006 external array (DMZ) -> Internal network <-
ISA2006 internal array (DMZ) <-Internal users
I would like to consolidate this configuration by removing the ISA2006
internal array and having all traffic handled by the external array.
That's good. There is no point in the two arrays you have and and no point in
having two Back-to-Back DMZs one behind the other as you have now.
However, this has to happen without internal traffic being routed to
the Internet.
Why would that ever happen to begin with? Things don't get routed somewhere
"just because",...things get routed to places because that is where they are
supposed to go. Routing is determined by the destination,...it doesn't matter if
it is dealing with firewalls, proxys, or simple LAN routers,...that doesn't
change.
option #1 - Create a 3rd NIC in theISAarray and route all requests
for the published servers through that NIC. I'm not sure if this will
work or if I need to use a NAT relationship.
No.
option #2 - Add a 2nd external interface on the PIX. NAT all internal
user traffic destined to the published servers through the PIX's 2nd
external interface which in turn will forward that toISA'sexternal
interface.
No.
Option #3
Get rid of the internal array. Re-address the internal facing Nic of what was
previously the external array and ajust the config of theISA'sto conform to
the address change. You now have an Edge Array between the LAN and the DMZ.
You now have a Back-to-Back DMZ sitting between theISAArray and the PIX. So if
you need a DMZ for some reason, that is where it is.
You would also be miles ahead if theISA'swere domain members, but that would
involve saving the config of eachISA, uninstallingISA, making the machine a
domain member, reinstallingISA, re-importing the config. In theory you can do
it on runningISA'sby adjusting the System Policies, but I have seen people
just make a big mess for themselves in the process of trying that. I prefer to
do it the safe way.
Debunking the Myth that theISAFirewall Should Not be a Domain Memberhttp://www.isaserver.org/tutorials/Debunking-Myth-that-ISA-Firewall-S...
--
Phillip Windellwww.wandtv.com
The views expressed, are my own and not those of my employer, or Microsoft, or
anyone else associated with me, including my cats.
-----------------------------------------------------
Understanding theISA2004 Access Rule Processinghttp://www.isaserver.org/articles/ISA2004_AccessRules.html
Troubleshooting Client Authentication on Access Rules inISAServer 2004http://download.microsoft.com/download/9/1/8/918ed2d3-71d0-40ed-8e6d-...
Microsoft Internet Security & Acceleration Server: Partnershttp://www.microsoft.com/isaserver/partners/default.asp
MicrosoftISAServer Partners: Partner Hardware Solutionshttp://www.microsoft.com/forefront/edgesecurity/partners/hardwarepart...
-----------------------------------------------------
Thanks Phillip.
I neglected to mention that the new consolidated array will be ISA
2006 Enterprise using new hardware. So I will be doing some of the
export/import tasks you mentioned above.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: ISA 2006 web proxy scenario
- From: Phillip Windell
- Re: ISA 2006 web proxy scenario
- References:
- ISA 2006 web proxy scenario
- From: guardian911
- Re: ISA 2006 web proxy scenario
- From: Phillip Windell
- ISA 2006 web proxy scenario
- Prev by Date: Re: MAC OS 10.3.9 cannot access internet via ISA EE 2006 proxy server
- Next by Date: Re: ISA 2006 web proxy scenario
- Previous by thread: Re: ISA 2006 web proxy scenario
- Next by thread: Re: ISA 2006 web proxy scenario
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|