From: Nate Kleven (cciemail@intellinet.ws)
Date: Mon Nov 18 2002 - 14:22:43 GMT-3
By using Kym's suggestion to build a Pool rather than nat to the interface,
I was able to make this work. I added the pool and built a null0 route to
it and redistributed static subnets and it came right up. Thanks Kym!
__________
Nate Kleven
-----Original Message-----
From: kym blair [mailto:kymblair@hotmail.com]
Sent: Sunday, November 17, 2002 1:22 AM
To: cciemail@intellinet.ws; ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: Re: NAT To Multiple Outside Interfaces
Nate,
Instead of natting to the E0 interface, nat to a pool:
ip nat pool NATPOOL 192.168.3.1 192.168.3.255 prefix-length 24 ip nat inside
source list 1 pool NATPOOL
You'll have to advertise the 192.168.3.0 network on the outside of course.
HTH, Kym
>From: Nate Kleven <cciemail@intellinet.ws>
>Reply-To: Nate Kleven <cciemail@intellinet.ws>
>To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
>Subject: NAT To Multiple Outside Interfaces
>Date: Sat, 16 Nov 2002 23:46:31 -0800
>
>There is probably a very easy solution to this, but it escapes me: Router
>1 has three interfaces, 1 ethernet and 2 serials. The ethernet is the
>NAT INSIDE interface. Clients on the inside need to be NAT'd for
>request going out both of the serial interfaces. How do I do this?
>Normally it would look something like this.
>
>
>
>Interface Ethernet 0
> ip nat inside
> ip address 10.0.0.1 255.255.255.0
>!
>!
>!
>Interface Serial 0
> ip nat outside
> ip address 192.68.1.1 255.255.255.0
>!
>Interface Serial 1
> ip nat outside
> ip address 192.68.2.1 255.255.255.0
>!
>ip nat inside source list 1 interface s0 overload
>!
>!
>access-list 1 permit 10.0.0.0 0.0.0.255
>
>
>In a configuration like this, my traffic would all go out Serial O
>because it is the one in the overload statement, right? What if I want
>to NAT a packet that is only reachable via serial 1? I'm sure I'm
>overlooking the obvious.
>
>Thanks in advance.
>
>Nate
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue Dec 03 2002 - 07:23:04 GMT-3