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
You should be able to use your normal pool and overload command,
eg ip nat inside source list 1 pool POOL overload,
You pool, for eg is 192.168.0.60-10.168.0.99, then the first 39 IP's would
be used for NAT, and the last will be use for PAT
=?iso-8859-1?q?ciscoGo2002?= wrote:
Hello friends
According to my experience you have got it the wrong way round.
Cisco IOS will do NAT until the pool runs out, then do PAT on the last IP.
This was a major issue when then documentation suggested the opposite. Not
sure if this is still the case though.
Peter
--On 03 April 2003 07:50
if you are right the router
does PAT with the last IP public address.
In this situation imagine the following cases:
1) The first translation time-outs, what happens
if another client arrives?? does the router do PAT or
NAT with this new client?? If the router does PAT...
does it take
I have been following this thread with great interest, for I had
problems with PAT/NAT in IOS recently. It looks to me that many people have
the same confusions (hopes) as I had.
I have a case where I have many users on private address space
(around 1000 or so) which must be NAT-ed
addresses got what. the outside address used by the fourth loopback
provides the answer to the mechanics of NAT/PAT.
Cisco documentation cannot be relied upon to be detailed enough provide the
actual mechanics of how this works. Nor may the actual mechanics be
consistent from IOS to IOS, let alone
this is the current nat setup I have on one of my PIXs:
global (outside) 1 xxx.xxx.223.235-64.172.223.236
global (outside) 1 xxx.xxx.223.237
nat (inside) 0 access-list 100
nat (inside) 1 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 0 0
heres the translations:
PAT Global xxx.xxx.223.237(16882) Local 192.168.2.18(2193
Hello folks,
I have question for you, we want to do dynamic NAT
with a pool of 128 public ip addresses (we haven't got
more public IP addresses :( ). Now, when the router
does 128 translation no one can access internet... We
would like to do PAT when NAT public addresses are
exhausted
Of course you can, but why not doing just PAT ?
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=66674t=66672
--
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure
ip addresses (we haven't got
more public IP addresses :( ). Now, when the router
does 128 translation no one can access internet... We
would like to do PAT when NAT public addresses are
exhausted.. is it possible? Can we do a mix of PAT and
NAT configuration? Any ideas? Any configs?
Thanks
The combination of both can be done without any issues. I would keep 1 IP
from the assigned range for the PAT address and have the others as 1 - 1
translations.
Andrew
CCNP, CCDP, CSS1
-Original Message-
From: ciscoGo2002 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 02 April 2003 12:58
To: [EMAIL
Yes, this is a typical setup.
Search cisco.com and you will find a sample config.
Symon
-Original Message-
From: ciscoGo2002 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 02 April 2003 11:58
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: PAT AFTER NAT...IS IT POSSIBLE??? [7:66672]
Hello folks,
I have question
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
Thanks Symon,
We really want to know more about the way the overload
works...
Maybe we were not so exactly as we wanted... We want
to know how can we use PAT when any others publics ips
are exhausted after using NAT?
For example, if we configure this:
ip nat inside source list pool
overload
I knew this was possible on the pix, but have never configured it on an IOS
router. It would be really appreciated if someone wouldn't mind posting a
sample config as I cannot locate one on cisco's site or the netpro forum
specific to IOS routers with both NAT and PAT configured like outlined
ip nat inside source list 1 pool kk overlad
How will this work??
A friend of mine told me that the router will
start doing NAT (one private address to one public
address) until the public pool is finished. After that
the router will start doing PAT. What do you think?? I
am very
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.
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=66708t=66672
--
FAQ, list archives
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
Fellows
I have PIX 501 on my home netwoek, it is connected with Cable Router, from
where its gets Dynamic Internet IP address.
Now lets say i want to run my Web Server or Email Server, i have to NAT or
PAT my Web Server Internal Address with Dynamic Internet IP address that PIX
gets from ISP.
My
What ver of IOS are you running?
also the command is:
global (outside) 1 interface
Josh
-Original Message-
From: Richard Campbell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, January 24, 2003 1:51 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: can't use outside inf IP as PAT global IP [7:61755]
Hi
Use the command below:
global (outside) 1 interface
-Original Message-
From: Richard Campbell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, January 24, 2003 1:51 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: can't use outside inf IP as PAT global IP [7:61755]
Hi.. I want to ask why I can't use outside
Thanks.. any disadvantage to do this compare with choosing a different IP?
pixfw1(config)# global (outside) 1 interface
Warning: Start and End addresses overlap with broadcast address.
outside interface address added to PAT pool
pixfw1(config)# exit
I am using the following version..
pixfw1
Hi.. I want to ask why I can't use outside interface IP as the PAT global
IP? See below? I recall that I can do that with Checkpoint. Why PIX can't?
What if I have no other global IP available for me? So, I should specify
60.8.200.115 as the PAT global IP? So will IP know how to come back
I have been assigned to install and configure the PIX firewall 515E in my
company, VPN clients will access our network through dialup connection, we
have only two free IP addresses, one of those IP addresses will be assigned
to the outside interface of firewall, the other one will be used with PAT
for the VPN Clients. This means, that if you don't plan on
hosting anything else behind the PIX for the world to access without a
VPN connection, i.e., a web server for the public, you will
automatically be doing PAT for all users behind the PIX accessing the
Internet. Hence, you will only need one Public
Okay Mark Thanks , I will dig out with what you sent me and I will
be back soon :)
Ismail Al-Shelh
-Original Message-
From: Mark W. Odette II [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Saturday, January 04, 2003 9:20 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: PIX 515E NAT/PAT [7:60291]
Searching
Hi,
http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/556/nat-faq.html#Q13 (including Q14)
describes the functionality when using multiple addresses in an overload. As
MADMAN says, it4s kind of arbitrary.
Some colleagues of mine tried to NAT/PAT in the same way that You want about
a year ago, but unfortunately
Can someone clear this up for me, I am running PAT on my router along with
Static NAT. I
have notice that
the host I am statically NATting is getting picked up by the PAT before the
Static NAT.
I am statically Natting a host that is part of the ACL pool for PAT.
I thought that the Static Nat would
DON'T inlcude your statics in the pool!!!
Dave
Karl West wrote:
Can someone clear this up for me, I am running PAT on my router along with
Static NAT. I
have notice that
the host I am statically NATting is getting picked up by the PAT before the
Static NAT.
I am statically Natting
Ok...so you are saying the PAT will be considered first? ...hmm and I would
have to break
up my pool.
MADMAN wrote:
DON'T inlcude your statics in the pool!!!
Dave
Karl West wrote:
Can someone clear this up for me, I am running PAT on my router along
with
Static NAT. I
have
.
If your doing PAT anyway why have a pool, save your addresses for
something else like more statics!!!
Dave
Karl West wrote:
Ok...so you are saying the PAT will be considered first? ...hmm and I
would have to break up my pool.
MADMAN wrote:
DON'T inlcude your statics
No that is not what I'm saying. When you define a static you are
defining a permenant translation for the express purpose of letting
connections thru initiated from the outside. You don't want to include
the permenant translation in your dynamic pool.
If your doing PAT anyway why have a pool
Try a 'clear ip nat translations'
i've had this same issue. it's just using the most recent translations.
you probably created your pat pool before before the static nat pool...
ed
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:nobody;groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
Karl West
Sent
Hello,
Quick question that I am having trouble locating the answer on.
Basically I need to know whether you can configure PAT to work in
conjunction with a NAT pool on an IOS router. 12.2.x on 2621?
Ex. Nat pool of 192.168.1.10-192.168.1.20 Once all nat pool IPs are
taken. Roll to a PAT
Kind of,
ip nat pool NATPOOL 192.168.1.10 192.168.1.20 netmask 255.255.255.0
ip nat inside source list 1 pool NATPOOL
ip access-list 1 permit 10.1.0.0 0.0.255.255
Where would one go from here to have the NAT pool of 1.10 to 1.20 utilized
and also PAT if every address is used from the pool
though unlike the PIX when you overload,
(PAT) on a router it's kinda arbitrary. Some connection will use NAT
and others will PAT, it does not wait until the last address in the pool
is used before converting to PAT.
Dave
trammer wrote:
Hello,
Quick question that I am
Dave,
Can you post an example. Is the syntax different then what I am thinking.
thnx
MADMAN wrote in message
news:200210241606.QAA03297;groupstudy.com...
Use the overload command though unlike the PIX when you overload,
(PAT) on a router it's kinda arbitrary. Some connection will use
Use the overload command though unlike the PIX when you overload,
(PAT) on a router it's kinda arbitrary. Some connection will use NAT
and others will PAT, it does not wait until the last address in the pool
is used before converting to PAT.
Dave
trammer wrote:
Hello,
Quick question
Add the command overload:
ip nat inside source list 1 pool NATPOOL overload
but like I mentioned earlier this does not mean IOS will use NAT until
the last address is used, it seems rather arbitrary wheras the PIX will
use all the NAT address before using PAT.
Dave
trammer wrote:
Kind
Hi all simple question. Is it possible to configure VPN on a router
connecting to the internet using PAT? Presumably it would need some static
mapping to enable the connections to be rooted to the router. has anyone
managed this any info is appreciated
thanks
Steven Greeno
Message Posted
Hello all,
i am trying to get as much as i can out of a single public IP on the outside
interface of a PIX 515e-R-DMZ-Bun (3 interfaces). i have set up static
routes and conduits to pass access along for the different ports as shown in
the example that follows but i am not able to access the
Check your IOS. I had this problem with 6.0. I downgraded to 5.2 and had
no problem.
Theo
Timur Snoke
Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
10/15/2002 04:27 AM
Please respond to Timur Snoke
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:
Subject:outside PAT on a 515e-R? [7:55581
I know that netMeeting will not work with Pat. If I add the established
command to the config will it resolve the problem?
established tcp 0 1731 permitto udp 0 permitfrom udp 1024-65535
established tcp 0 1503 permitto udp 0 permitfrom udp 1024-65535
established tcp 0 389 permitto udp 0
...
Therefore I ended up having to use two Public IP addresses ... one for the
interface and the other for the global NAT/PAT ...
Please tell me if Im incorrect !!!
Regards
Paul ...
- Original Message -
From: nrf
To:
Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2002 2:59 AM
Subject: Re: PAT on PIX
Come on, guys. I hate to put it to you this way, but RTFM. I really don't
want to come off as overly harsh, but in the future, just remember that the
docs really do contain a lot of answers.
The following example enables PAT using the IP address at the outside
interface in global configuration
Can I use the outside interface IP address to do PAT on the PIX Firewall
?.
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: Click Here
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=52258t=52258
Yes
mindiani mindiani wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
Can I use the outside interface IP address to do PAT on the PIX Firewall
?.
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile devic
through PAT? [7:49754]
I'd like to install my own DNS server on my home network, but it seems
like
I've run into some problems :-(
Since I only got one public IP address from my provider I'm running Port
Address Translation to be able to gain Internet access from the PC's on
my
LAN.
I also use static
mics NAT over PAT? What
will
happen if the dynamic NAT pool of IP address used up? And I have a
problem
two of the inside local address translate to the same inside global as
following. Therefore two workstations will have problem connecting
(50.198.164.227 and 50.198.164.227) How to
sorry itsme can you elaborate what is mean by outside NAT?
From: itsme
Reply-To: itsme
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Any advantage of dynamics NAT over PAT [7:46323]
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2002 21:02:03 -0400
NAT is one to one so all ports can be utilized as I sure
you know, depending
Hi.. May I know is there any advantage of dynamics NAT over PAT? What will
happen if the dynamic NAT pool of IP address used up? And I have a problem
two of the inside local address translate to the same inside global as
following. Therefore two workstations will have problem connecting
kstation on
the inside.
- Original Message -
From: Paul
To:
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2002 4:07 PM
Subject: Cisco VPN client and NAT/PAT [7:45473]
Hi
I have setup a Pix 515 so that it authenticates and accepts a remote
user
via dial-up, allowing them full access to the corpo
Hi
I have setup a Pix 515 so that it authenticates and accepts a remote user
via dial-up, allowing them full access to the corporate LAN. The only problem
that I have is that the remote user cannot connect via cable modem/adsl etc
the connection is initialised, the remote security
, May 30, 2002 4:07 PM
Subject: Cisco VPN client and NAT/PAT [7:45473]
Hi
I have setup a Pix 515 so that it authenticates and accepts a remote
user
via dial-up, allowing them full access to the corporate LAN. The only
problem
that I have is that the remote user cannot connect via cable
Hello everybody,
I have configured a PIX 515E v6.1(2) with following
for NAT/PAT address translation :
ip address outside x.y.z.2 255.255.255.0
ip address inside 192.168.0.1 255.255.255.0
route outside 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 x.y.z.1 1
global (outside) 1 x.y.z.100-x.y.z.253
global (outside) 1 x.y.z
Hello,
That is a pretty standard way of doing PAT overloading. I use it on 4 or 5
firewalls in this manner. I would suggest double,then triple checking
The global for typo's. I suspect that the PAT global might have an incorrect
address. Try and see if those uses that have a PAT address can ping
Cisco say that one gloabal IP address can be used for up to 64,000 local
addresses
I want to use the same method for 100 - 130 predominantly web-browsing
end-users through a PIX 515.
Has anyone had any experience of this .. and does anyone forsee any problems
!!! this is the first
the
encryption processing much like a math co-processor.
On the other hand you are talking about the PAT and NAT capabilities of the
PIX. I believe that the 515 is rated at somewhere around 125,000
simultaneous sessions through it. The net 515E even has a more powerful
processor. I would say that for 100
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: configure VPN on PIX which behind PAT router [7:41090]
Thanks Mike. You are 100% correct when you describe my limitations. Well, I
am doing something Mission Impossible.
I have setup the PIX firewall without NAT. It's the Cayman Router who did
the PAT. And I did Pinhole
Is it possible to specify a port range in IOS 12.0(15) on a Cisco 1604?
Could some point me in the right direction for the command format is
possible?
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=41001t=41001
--
FAQ, list
Hi Stephen,
are you looking for a command to limit the ports used by PAT ? AFAIK, this
is not possible through the 'overload' command. If you know exactly which
ports your hosts use, you could set up an extended access list specifying
the ports that you want to allow.
Regards,
Georg
Message
Well I was looking for a way to specify a port range in a nat statement.
For example:
standart nat/pat statement.
ip nat inside source static tcp 10.0.0.1 21 208.192.100.100 21
I need something like this:
ip nat inside source static tcp 10.0.0.1 64300-64400 208.192.100.100
64300-64400
What I
I am configuring a PIX firewall behind a Cayman DSL router. The whole
network only has one public IP address which is on the DSL interface. I need
to configure the PIX firewall for the remote VPN clients.
My solution is to encapsulate all IPSEC traffic with TCP 1, or UDP
1, so the Cayman
Daniel- I may be clueless to some fancy configuration on PAT, but it is my
belief from my experience that you can't do what you're trying to do.
Your Limitations are:
1. The Cayman Router (It only Does PAT itself, and doesn't have the ability
to terminate VPNs- I can only PASS Thru the the IPSEC
Thanks Mike. You are 100% correct when you describe my limitations. Well, I
am doing something Mission Impossible.
I have setup the PIX firewall without NAT. It's the Cayman Router who did
the PAT. And I did Pinhole on Cayman router to the mail server which behind
the firewall. Everything works
Hi Group,
Any one has idea how to figure out or how to connect to specific service
via an outside ip address that is being pat on a router
Best Regards
Have A Good Day!!
++
Farhan Ahmed
MCSE+I, MCP Win2k, CCA, CCDA, CCNA, CSE , CCNP
Network Engineer
]
Subject: PAT [7:37848]
Hi Group,
Any one has idea how to figure out or how to connect to specific service
via an outside ip address that is being pat on a router
Best Regards
Have A Good Day!!
++
Farhan Ahmed
MCSE+I, MCP Win2k, CCA, CCDA, CCNA, CSE
Cisco Pix Pat Ouside address to Inside address?
for exampe:
|---205.11.1.0---|
|
|
(outside Security L 0)
(--PIX
-
Van: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Namens Ivan
Verzonden: zaterdag 2 maart 2002 8:31
Aan: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Onderwerp: PIX PAT Problem!! Urgent [7:37052]
Hi all,
That is Very very Urgent!!!Please Help!!!
Does anyone know that Can Cisco Pix Pat Ouside address to Inside address
Sorry, misunderstood. Excuse the BW I spilled. Next time better.
Martijn
_
Chat on line met vrienden en probeer MSN Messenger uit:
http://messenger.msn.nl
Message Posted at:
or external:
ROUTE if_name ip_address netmask gateway_ip [metric]
ROUTE if_name 205.11.1.0 255.255.255.0 10.1.1.100
Try that.
Thanks,
Leslie McIntosh
--- Ivan wrote:
Hi all,
That is Very very Urgent!!!Please Help!!!
Does anyone know that Can Cisco Pix Pat Ouside
address to Inside address
Yes but there are caveats. You cannot do an all inclusive static mapping to
a PAT interface but you can redirect certain traffic based on port to
specific inside hosts.
For example, if you only have a single outside address and you are using it
on your outside interface, not only can you use
10.1.1.100
Try that.
Thanks,
Leslie McIntosh
--- Ivan wrote:
Hi all,
That is Very very Urgent!!!Please Help!!!
Does anyone know that Can Cisco Pix Pat Ouside
address to Inside address?
for exampe:
|---205.11.1.0
Hi all,
That is Very very Urgent!!!Please Help!!!
Does anyone know that Can Cisco Pix Pat Ouside address to Inside address?
for exampe:
|---205.11.1.0---|
|
|
(outside
, downgraded to 5.2.21 and got things to work I am
confident that this will cause it to work.
I additionally got the PAT-VPN and Internet access to work on one side.
With a IOS Firewall Router VPN PIX 6.01 VPN PAT. I got 3 devices to encrypt
and use the Internet at the same time from the PIX side. I
IPSec does not work with PAT on a PIX. You can with NAT though.
http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/707/ipsecnat.html
Allen
- Original Message -
From: Theodore stout
To:
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2001 1:02 AM
Subject: RE: PIX with PAT and VPN [7:23490]
I got the same access-lists
You definately want to use a different ip addres for PAT than what you have
set on the interface. I'm surprised PAT is even working, unless cisco has
made some changes to their code recently.
-Patrick
Theodore stout 10/24/01 02:02AM
I got the same access-lists on both sides and they have
PAT can now use the same address as the outside interface with the
'interface' keyword:
e.g., global (outside) 1 interface
- Original Message -
From: Patrick Ramsey
To:
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2001 7:34 AM
Subject: RE: PIX with PAT and VPN [7:23490]
You definately want to use
Started with PIX version 5.2
Don Claybrook wrote:
PAT can now use the same address as the outside interface with the
'interface' keyword:
e.g., global (outside) 1 interface
- Original Message -
From: Patrick Ramsey
To:
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2001 7:34 AM
Subject: RE: PIX
] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2001 11:02 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: PIX with PAT and VPN [7:23490]
I got the same access-lists on both sides and they have been verified by
other people. I know this will not take me down.
If you can e-mail me the config
between two LAN segments.
Just make sure access-list is mirror image on both peers.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 1:41 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: PIX with PAT and VPN [7:23490]
I tried this and it did
is theoritical and promises but it doesn't work like
Checkpoint.
What I am fearing is that it is the command Global (outside) 1 interface),
that is giving me the grief. I think that I will need another IP address
for PAT instead of using the same IP for the interface and PAT. In your
response, you
I tried this and it did not work. When IPSEC negociates a VPN session
between the two PIX's, it will PAT an internal device from Network A as
206.112.71.5 and use 206.112.71.5:500 for the negociation. Once another
device wishes to access a device behind 206.112.71.6, it will have to use
is that I only have one IP address per-site. In all of the
solutions provided by Cisco, I would need a pool of registered IP addresses
for NAT. PAT is not even possible.
I know that this VPN-PAT-FW1FW1-PAT-VPN solution is available with
Checkpoint. However, I would prefer a Cisco only solution
(inside) 1 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 0 0.Then input global
(outside) 1 206.112.71.5
Now on PIX2 input nat (inside) 1 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 0 0.Then input global
(outside) 1 206.112.71.6
Now just complete your isakmp and crypto-map settings and you will be doing
one single VPN between peers and PAT
Has anyone come across performance specs, statistics, or costs (latency or
otherwise) for NAT PAT services ???
Thanks
Phil
PS- no wise-acre's please, I know all about www.Cisco.com :o)
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=19899t=19899
If you use NAT, you are generally just trying to hide ips, or trying to
shovel many ips of one domain (in the mathematical sense) into another
smaller domain. If you use NAPT (or the Cisco term, PAT), you are
multiplexing connections against ips + ports, instead of just IPs. Of
course
Here's a puzzler for you:
Their 192.168.10.0/24 Network
|
Their Default gateway
|
Their VPN 3030 Concentrator running PAT w/ external interface 2.2.2.2
(Reference Point A)
|
Another default gateway leading to...
|
The Internet
|
My gateway router
using a net use command that has a different UN PW than my normal
account
When I change it to NAT (ie. not PAT) it works just fine.
Why is this?
Thanks in advance,
Paul
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=17469t=17469
:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
First thing that jumps into mind is why don't you define a loopback
interface with an ip address?
Martijn
-Oorspronkelijk bericht-
Van: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Namens Ruddy
Cordero
Verzonden: vrijdag 30 maart 2001 16:52
Aan: [EMAIL PROTECTE
PROTECTED]]Namens Ruddy
Cordero
Verzonden: vrijdag 30 maart 2001 16:52
Aan: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Onderwerp: PAT
I have a frame relay circuit connected to a 1750
router with an =
ip-unnumbered assign to the serial int to point to
the Ethernet =
interface. I shut down the Ethernet interface
I have a frame relay circuit connected to a 1750 router with an =
ip-unnumbered assign to the serial int to point to the Ethernet =
interface. I shut down the Ethernet interface and configured a second =
serial interface on the router with the ip add. that is attached to a =
Cisco 2600 router. I
First thing that jumps into mind is why don't you define a loopback
interface with an ip address?
Martijn
-Oorspronkelijk bericht-
Van: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Namens Ruddy
Cordero
Verzonden: vrijdag 30 maart 2001 16:52
Aan: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Onderwerp: PAT
I have
Warrick FitzGerald wrote:
Hi All,
I am trying to configure NAT/PAT where all I am trying to do is change to
Destination Port (DP) of traffic ie. all traffic with a DP of 443 and a
specific destination IP Address (DA) of xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx should be NAT'ed to
xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx with a DP of 444
Hi All,
I am trying to configure NAT/PAT where all I am trying to do is change to
Destination Port (DP) of traffic ie. all traffic with a DP of 443 and a
specific destination IP Address (DA) of xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx should be NAT'ed to
xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx with a DP of 444.
Why does this not work ?
ip
PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: NAT/PAT Question
Hi All,
I am trying to configure NAT/PAT where all I am trying to do
is change to
Destination Port (DP) of traffic ie. all traffic with a DP of
443 and a
specific destination IP Address (DA) of xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx
should be NAT'ed
:
http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/iaabu/pix/pix_v53/config/adv
anced.htm#xtocid579420
I found it relatively easy to set up, considering this was my first time
configuring a VPN. Also, I did get this to work with NAT, but according to
CCO, it will not work with PAT.
Good luck
Hi all,
Im just experimenting with NAT/PAT and want to try to tunnel back to an
internal NT server to establish a VPN with it. Say the internal address is
10.1.1.100 I want to pass all traffic from the external IP w.x.y.z(i s0) to
internal 10.1.1.100(int e0) for the following ports
Protocol ID
Can someone tell me any benefits to using NAT instead of PAT? I know with
PAT, you can translate up to 64,000 addresses, but with NAT it is one to
one.
Thanks,
Nathan Richie
_
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
NAT like u said is a one to one translation between the external IP and the
internal one (at its purest form)
When u use NAT overloading u r also using PAT, hence u really cannot compare
the twoThey work in cunjunction
I personally like to think of PAT as what most people refer to as NAT
I
1 - 100 of 132 matches
Mail list logo
