I appreciate your assistance. Assuming that this the secondary interface is required. Can the same be achieved by overloading to a POOL instead? I dont understand why you need to have a secondary IP address when the ISP is already routing traffic to the 198 subnet.
Also, say that traffic reaches the router that is intended to go to the PCa. I see that your access-list states: access-list 102 deny tcp host 192.x.x.5 any eq 0 access-list 102 deny udp host 192.x.x.5 any eq 0 Why do you specify the internal PCa address versus the global address that it is using? Does this mean that IP nat statements are looked at before access-list deny statements are? Thanks for the explanation. JunoGuy Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=42380&t=42351 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
