From: Frank Jimenez (franjime@xxxxxxxxx)
Date: Tue Mar 12 2002 - 19:08:07 GMT-3
Order of operations...
http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/556/5.html
Policy Routing, then NAT inside-to-outside (local to
global translations). So, following that logic, if a
packet matches the policy route, it is not NATed, which
is exactly what you are seeing occur.
Frank Jimenez, CCIE #5738
franjime@cisco.com
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
Bob Sinclair
Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2002 3:31 PM
To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: NAT and Policy Routing
Folk:
Sorry if this has been covered before, but I can't seem to find anything
on this point in the archives or on CCO.
Got NAT working fine. Got policy routing working fine. But not the
combination. I would like to NAT on a router, and also do a policy that
gives a default next-hop IP address if there is not a route in the
table. Seems that when the policy kicks in, the NAT does not happen.
Have seen in previous posts the statement that the policy routing takes
place before the NAT (inside to outside). But I am getting no NAT at
all with the policy enabled.
Anyone have an idea as to how this can work?
Thanks in advance.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:57:02 GMT-3