Re: NAT no-alias

Thank you Tony. So this command only applies to MPLS? Seems like it's
origin is pre-MPLS.

Matt

On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 5:01 PM, Tony Singh <mothafungla_at_gmail.com> wrote:

>
>
>
> *Note*
> ------------------------------
>
> When you configure NAT with a VRF-enabled interface address that acts as
> the global address, you must configure the ip nat inside source static
> no-alias command. If the no-alias keyword is not configured, Telnet to
> the VRF-enabled interface address fails.
> ------------------------------
>
> So use case in your scenario is lost as it's not a vrf enabled interface
>
> --
> BR
>
> Tony
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On 27 Nov 2013, at 21:41, Matt Sherman <matt.sherman2_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> Can someone clear up for me what "no-alias" is supposed to do with NAT.
> The scenario I'm testing is this -
>
> R7 (f0/0) -- (f0/0) R1 (s1/1) -- (s1/1) R3
>
> R7 (f0/0) = 192.168.4.110
> R1 (f0/0) = 192.168.4.1
> R1 (s1/1) = 192.168.13.1
> R3 (s1/1) = 192.168.13.3
>
> Translating R3's 192.168.13.3 to 192.168.4.3 on R1 works fine. I can ping
> R7 from R3.
> _________________________________________________
> ((R1))
> ip nat inside source static 192.168.13.1 192.168.4.3
> !
> int s1/1
> ip nat inside
> !
> int f0/0
> ip nat outside
> _________________________________________________
>
> But when I put the no-alias extenstion on the static NAT (ip nat inside
> source static 192.168.13.1 192.168.4.3 no-alias), R3 can no longer ping or
> connect to R7.
>
> I know that adding the "no-alias" makes R1 no longer reply to ARPs for the
> translated address (192.168.4.3) but then what's the point? It breaks all
> communication.
>
> Thanks,
> Matt
>
>
> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html

Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
Received on Thu Nov 28 2013 - 11:02:04 ART