From: Donny mateo Tandase (donnymateo@yahoo.com)
Date: Mon Dec 06 2004 - 05:55:57 GMT-3
Tim
I don't have Doel with me right now and I don't have the other book.
But lets see a sample usage of static route-map, see whether Doel is trying to achieve the same thing.
For instance you have a router with 3 interface. 1 to your LAN (100.0.0.0/8) and 2 to another network 1.0.0.0/8 and 2.0.0.0/8. LAN is NAT inside interface and the rest are NAT outside interface.
Now what static NAT with route map can achieve is to use a different static translation for the same source when going out to certain destination.
So say
100.1.1.1 going to 1.1.1.1 would be translated to 1.100.100.100 while
100.1.1.1 going to 2.2.2.2 would be translated to 2.100.100.100.
I don't know how to achieve the same with normal static NAT or dynamic NAT. This can be done by using static NAT with route-map. The past static NAT will NAT source to the static IP address configured without regards on which destination the traffic actually goes to.
Cheers,
D.
ccie2be <ccie2be@nyc.rr.com> wrote:
Thanks Sameh for your response.
Actually, I was aware of that, but what I wanted to make sure of is whether
there was something I was missing in the Deal example that REQUIRED the use
of route-maps since the Doyle example seems to accomplish the same exact
thing without using route-map.
In other words, what added functionality does using the route-maps provide
if, as the Doyle shows you, the same thing can be accomplished without
route-maps?
Thanks again, Tim
----- Original Message -----
From: "Sameh El Tawil"
To: "ccie2be" ; "Group Study"
Sent: Sunday, December 05, 2004 11:05 AM
Subject: Re: Face-Off - Dolye vs Deal on NAT
> Tim,
> The static translation with a route-map is a new feature in 12.2(4)T. This
> was released sometime in mid 2004 and did not exist when Doyle released
his
> book. Before that route-maps were only allowed with dynamic translations.
>
> HTH,
> Sameh
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "ccie2be"
> To: "Group Study"
> Sent: Sunday, December 05, 2004 4:32 PM
> Subject: Face-Off - Dolye vs Deal on NAT
>
>
> > Hi guys,
> >
> > In the book, Cisco Router Firewall Security, by Richard Deal on page 520
> he
> > has an example of static translation
> >
> > which almost exactly the same as the example in Doyle's Routing TCP/IP v
> II on
> > page 378.
> >
> > The only difference is that Deal uses a route-map in the static
> translation,
> > Dolye does not.
> >
> > My question is whether the route-map is REQUIRED in Deal's example or is
> it
> > just to show that's it's possible to use a route-map.
> >
> > Given Dolye's example of the same scenario, it seems to me that the
> route-map
> > is NOT required, but I want to make sure I'm not missing something.
> >
> > TIA, Tim
> >
> > _______________________________________________________________________
> > 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 - 10:31:24 GMT-3