Hello friends,
Thankyou for your answeres, but I have more doubts:
Config:
ip nat inside source list 1 pool POOL overload
If have understood your answers, the router start
doing PAT with the first IP address and doesn't takes
the next avalaible public IP address until PAT is
exhausted with the first IP address, right?? But if
this is the way it works I think we never use the rest
of the public IP's in the pool because there are not
enough clients to exhaust PAT with the first IP... I
think it will be much better if the router starts
doing PAT and after the pool is exhausted.
I cannot do NAT 1:1 and reserve one public IP to do
PAT, because I don't want to give the same IP to a set
of clients and not to another...
Is it really the way that "overlad" works inside a
pool??? Please, I am very curious...
I don't have a router to play, so I cannot test
this on myself.....
Thanks friends...
Por favor, responda a "Adam"
Enviado por: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Destinatarios: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
CC:
Asunto: Re: Re: PAT AFTER NAT...IS IT POSSIBLE???
[7:66672
This is what I have run into in the past and I was
almost certain that it
was not possible. I set it up in the lab here with
various configs and had
the same result.
As far as I was told in the last routing update I
attended at our local
cisco office, the SE's there confirmed that the PIX
can be defined with a
NAT Pool of addresses and then have the same pool
statement entered only
this time specifying the same address (ie. PAT) as an
overload. They
confirmed that the IOS router code does not function
like this and that you
would have to statically NAT those addresses that you
wanted 1:1 on and then
have a blanket PAT (overload) statement in to cover
the rest.
In the case of the original question with wanting to
NAT 128 clients 1:1 and
then have PAT for the rest, this would require a lot
of configuration and to
guarantee that 1:1 would occur (or to at least keep
track of it) you would
require static IPs on the clients wishing to 1:1 NAT.
Hope I'm not flying way offline here but I believe
this is the only way
possible with an IOS router.
Cheers
> I've found that you cannot do this, at least not
when you do nat to a pool
> of addresses. You have to do static nat, then
overload the rest. I tried
> adding overload to the end of my existing nat
statment with the pool, it
> started PATing the addresses from the beginning.
Instead of using the 1:1
> from the pool, then pating anything beyond that.
>
> ""Lee Carter"" wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Yes you can just take your nat statement (ip nat
inside source list 1...)
> > and add the word overload on the end of the
command.
> >
> > You will use a 1:1 NAT for the first set of users.
Once your IP's are
used
> > up you will use PAT. It is important to note that
some issues arise with
> PAT
> > versus NAT like IPSEC or DLSW.
> >
> > just an fyi.
--
Composed with Newz Crawler 1.3
http://www.newzcrawler.com/
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
___________________________________________________
Yahoo! Messenger - Nueva versisn GRATIS
Super Webcam, voz, caritas animadas, y mas...
http://messenger.yahoo.es
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=66734&t=66734
--------------------------------------------------
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
