Contact US

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you a
Computer / IT professional?
Join Tek-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!

*Tek-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Partly-dynamic / partly-static NAT

Partly-dynamic / partly-static NAT

Partly-dynamic / partly-static NAT

For historical reasons, we have to NAT just one of our networks on its way to a colo. Our network is, the colo's is, and most of our networks can go through untranslated--but another customer is using, so we have to translate that one: our 10.1.x.y <=> 10.2.x.y, with x and y remaining constant.
I set that up a couple of weeks ago and it works fine. HOWEVER, when a server at the colo tries to access a printer on our, it uses the NATted address (as it should), and that address comes right through the "outside" interface and never gets translated.
The problem is, basically, that the only way a translation gets added to the NAT table is when a packet from enters the "inside" interface bound for I need that to keep happening, but I also need packets from entering the "outside" interface to have their destination addresses translated from 10.2.x.y to 10.1.x.y, and again x and y must stay the same.
The only way I see to get this done is to add static NATs for the dozen or two printer addresses, but I really hate to do that--it's ugly and cumbersome. Anyone see another way?

RE: Partly-dynamic / partly-static NAT

In your case your only option would be Static Nat. However, the bigger question is why isn't your network segmented at the colo? Each client of a colo should be in a separate VRF in which there would be no IP overlap and no nat necessary.

RE: Partly-dynamic / partly-static NAT

Brianinms, thanks for the reply. Cisco Tech Support concurs. An interesting difference between the Cisco ASA and its IOS routers: the ASA had no trouble with this, the router....
As to your bigger question, the answer may be that we're passing through an MPLS cloud and the provider is willing to provide only so many layers of VRF. I know that another parallel situation we have, all the clients' traffic is NATted on the way to the colo. The NATting is done on the provider's edge routers.
Anyway, thanks for the help.

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Tek-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Tek-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Tek-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Tek-Tips and talk with other members! Already a Member? Login

Close Box

Join Tek-Tips® Today!

Join your peers on the Internet's largest technical computer professional community.
It's easy to join and it's free.

Here's Why Members Love Tek-Tips Forums:

Register now while it's still free!

Already a member? Close this window and log in.

Join Us             Close