From: jeremy co (jeremy.cool14@gmail.com)
Date: Sat Mar 28 2009 - 23:42:47 ART
Divin,
well if it happened as u described , it wouldn't be interesting NAT scenario
:)
u can lab it up. what make me surprise is not involving outside int in NAT
scenario since by general ACL I wrote router's local interface will involve
in NAT process, I know it doesn't make sense but it's what happened :) what
makes me dizzy is wired behavior of NAT regard participating this interface
or not, if I ping befor forming neibour ship translation would add to NAT
table and adj never would be formed, but if I leave it with clear ip nat
trans * before forming adj, it will form adj!!!!
maybe guys , experienced before can help on that
Jeremy
On Sun, Mar 29, 2009 at 5:38 AM, Divin Mathew John <divinjohn@gmail.com>wrote:
> To add to the explaination OSPF neighbourship's are formed by the
> interface connecting the R2 to R3...so i guess NAT doesnt apply here!
> Thanking You
>
> Yours Sincerely
>
> Divin Mathew John
> divinjohn@gmail.com
> divin@dide3d.com
> +91 9945430983
> +91 9846697191
> +974 5008916
> PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK @ http://www.dide3d.com/divin_Public_PGP_key.txt
>
>
>
> On Sun, Mar 29, 2009 at 12:05 AM, Divin Mathew John <divinjohn@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > ithin the router R2.. i guess it doesn't get NATed.!
> > see
Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Mon Apr 06 2009 - 06:44:08 ART