From: Larry Roberts (groupstudy@american-hero.com)
Date: Thu Dec 02 2004 - 15:59:50 GMT-3
without the "overload" keyword, the 29th NAT translation will fail.
with "overload" PAT kicks in.
Larry
Phil wrote:
> That is a good question. Without trying in the lab I would say that if
> your nat command is:
>
> ip nat inside source list 1 pool SMALL overload
>
> It will use PAT on the NATed source addresses, but every source will
> be 204.1.1.3 with different port numbers. Without the "overload"
> keyword my guess is that it will not work after the last address in
> the pool is used.
>
> Phil
>
> On Thu, 2 Dec 2004 13:34:59 -0500, ccie2be <ccie2be@nyc.rr.com> wrote:
>
>>Hi guys,
>>
>>I've seen several examples where the pool of addresses (Inside Global) is
>>smaller than the number of Inside Local that might potentially need to be
>>translated.
>>
>>For example, let's say the inside local address is 10.0.1.0/24 which is 254
>>potential addresses to be translated.
>>
>>Also, assume the pool of Inside Global address is define like this:
>>
>>ip nat pool SMALL 204.1.1.3 204.1.1.31 netmask 255.255.255.0
>>
>>which is a total of 28 addresses.
>>
>>What happens when the 29th Inside Local address needs to be tranlated?
>>
>>Does it just not work or does NAT "know" to now use extended translation
>>tables?
>>
>>TIA, Tim
>>
>>_______________________________________________________________________
>>Subscription information may be found at:
>>http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Mon Jan 03 2005 - 10:31:23 GMT-3