Yes it apparently will though you may want to consider using 
access-lists:

pix520a# sh ver

Cisco PIX Firewall Version 6.3(1)
Cisco PIX Device Manager Version 3.0(0)148

Compiled on Wed 19-Mar-03 11:49 by morlee

pix520a up 14 days 14 hours

Hardware:   SE440BX2, 128 MB RAM, CPU Pentium II 350 MHz
Flash i28F640J5 @ 0x300, 16MB
BIOS Flash AT29C257 @ 0xfffd8000, 32KB

0: ethernet0: address is 00e0.b601.53ae, irq 11
1: ethernet1: address is 00e0.b601.53ad, irq 10
2: ethernet2: address is 00e0.b601.53ac, irq 15
3: ethernet3: address is 00e0.b601.53ab, irq 9
Licensed Features:
Failover:           Enabled
VPN-DES:            Enabled
VPN-3DES-AES:       Enabled
Maximum Interfaces: 6
Cut-through Proxy:  Enabled
Guards:             Enabled
URL-filtering:      Enabled
Inside Hosts:       Unlimited
Throughput:         Unlimited
IKE peers:          Unlimited

This PIX has an Unrestricted (UR) license.

Serial Number: 18030930 (0x1132152)
Running Activation Key: 0x7dc69417 0xc12446e6 0xa50ade1c 0x26b8c0ff
Configuration last modified by enable_15 at 12:09:28.767 UTC Fri May 30 2003
pix520a# conf t
pix520a(config)# conduit ?
Usage:  [no] conduit deny|permit |object-group 

                   | object-group 
                 [  [] | object-group 
]
                   | object-group 
                 [  [] | object-group 
]
[no] conduit deny|permit icmp   | object-group 

                   | object-group 
                 [ | object-group ]
pix520a(config)# conduit

Manny wrote:
> Has anyone upgraded to 6.3? Will I still be able to use conduits and
> static's? I currently have a 515 running  6.1(2).
-- 
David Madland
CCIE# 2016
Sr. Network Engineer
Qwest Communications
612-664-3367

"Government can do something for the people only in proportion as it
can do something to the people." -- Thomas Jefferson




Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=69886&t=69876
--------------------------------------------------
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to