You may have more interfaces where you do not want to nat.
> From: [email protected] > Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2011 13:38:53 +0430 > To: [email protected] > Subject: [c-nsp] why to define both inside and outside interfaces when > setting up nat? > > Hi all, > > I'm wondering why we should define both inside and outside interfaces to get > nat worked when we just only want to run inside source natting? In the case > of inside source nat, only outside interface is important for natting; the > packets are natted on their way outside so there is no need to specify > inside interfaces. Is there a specific reason that both inside and outside > interfaces should be specified? > > here is an example of nat configuration: > > interface GigabitEthernet0/0 > ip address 11.11.11.1 255.255.255.0 > ip nat inside > ! > interface GigabitEthernet0/1 > ip address 172.16.10.64 255.255.255.0 > ip nat outside > ! > ip nat pool test 172.16.10.1 172.16.10.63 prefix-length 24 > ip nat inside source list 7 pool test > ! > access-list 7 permit 11.11.11.0 0.0.0.255 > ! > > in this example, packets from inside network with source addresses of > 11.11.11.0 are natted to the range (172.16.10.1-172.16.10.63) when exiting > GigabitEthernet0/1 which is outside interface. why should GigabitEthernet0/0 > should be specified as inside interface to make the nat do its work? > > any comments are appreciated. > _______________________________________________ > 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/
