Yes, NAT Overload in a VRF is not supported on any Sup720 based system. It might work on Sup2t, but I'm not sure.
On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 10:10 AM, Dan Benson <[email protected]> wrote: > Thanks Peter. > > I found that by simply removing the VRF from the interfaces I wished to do > nat on (even though they were in the same VRF) allowed my nat to overload. > Is this expected behavior? > > All is working now. > > Thanks all for your help. > > db > > On Nov 26, 2013, at 6:18 PM, Pete Lumbis <[email protected]> wrote: > > > The question is will basic NAT overload work without VRFs on SX code? > Yes, given the endless list of 6k NAT limitations. > > > > > > On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 10:37 AM, Dan Benson <[email protected]> > wrote: > > All, > > > > >From reading it seems the 7600 does not support NAT in vrf (without an > FWSM) but I thought I would ask the question. I have two interfaces in the > same VRF (inside and outside) and I am able to static translate inbound but > I am unable to overload with TCP and udp packets. ICMP packets traverse the > interfaces but nothing else. Will this work if I don’t have the VRF? > > > > I am running s72033-adventerprisek9-mz.151-1.SY.bin. > > > > Thanks in advance for your insight. > > > > db > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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/ > _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
