Hi Josh, I can see how that would be confusing. I should have stated that router C belongs to a customer in our colo and that their internet access is through our network. The core router mentioned is ours and router A,B and C all belong to our customer.
Troy Beisigl -----Original Message----- From: Higham, Josh [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, September 17, 2007 1:23 PM To: Troy Beisigl Subject: RE: [c-nsp] NAT question. Based on this comment, your nat is the reverse of what you want. This translation table means that router C is translating the SOURCE IP ADDRESS from 10.2.0.1 to 66.X.A.99 when sending traffic TO 66.X.Y.129. If the 10.x network is outside your network, and you want to NAT so that your core doesn't see 10.x addresses, then you need to nat the outside traffic, which is the opposite of most configurations. Hope that helps, Josh > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Troy Beisigl > Sent: Monday, September 17, 2007 10:33 AM > To: 'Vincent De Keyzer' > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [c-nsp] NAT question. > > sh ip nat translations > Pro Inside global Inside local Outside local > Outside global > icmp 66.X.A.99:9893 10.2.0.1:9893 66.X.Y.129:9893 > 66.X.Y.129:9893 > > > I know that it the router is not doing NAT correctly because > even though is > shows up in the tables, our core routers are seeing the 10. > address and not > the public address. Below is from the console of one of our > core routers > that router C hands off traffic to for the outside world. > > Sep 17 17:17:20: ICMP: dst (10.2.0.1) host unreachable sent > to 66.X.Y.129 > > > > Troy Beisigl > > -----Original Message----- > From: Vincent De Keyzer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, September 17, 2007 6:04 AM > To: 'Troy Beisigl' > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: RE: [c-nsp] NAT question. > > > packets from the Ethernet of Router A do not seem to get > nat'd, however to > > show up in the nat translations table. > > What do you mean by that? Please post outputs of "sh ip nat > tran" for both > 192.168 and 10. What makes you think that don't "get nat'd" ? > > Vincent > > > _______________________________________________ > cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp > archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ > _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
