ASA Policy NAT not working at all...

  • Follow


My policy NAT does not appear to be working at all...

I was having trouble with it as seen in my previoues post

http://groups.google.com/group/comp.dcom.sys.cisco/browse_thread/thread/fa570f250a67a170

So I gave up on that approach and I change my ACL to

access-list policy_PAT_server extended permit ip host SERVER PRIVATE IP
any

nat (inside) 1 access-list policy_PAT_server
global (outside) 1 PUBLIC IP #2

my other NAT is:

nat (inside) Private Subnet (includes PCs and server)
global (outside) PUBLIC IP #1

Everything is getting translated by the second NAT statement!

Is there something wrong here?

Thanks.

0
Reply Holleran.Kevin (48) 9/14/2006 3:58:31 PM

okay it is working now.  I had to clear out the current translations
held in the table.

Shouldn't it make the translation when I telnet PUBLIC IP #2 port 25?

I am not seeing anything when I sh xlate PUBLIC IP #2 after I telnet
and my telnet's are getting a connection time out.

I am telnetting from my router which is at the edge of my network,
there is  static route pointing to the ASA and there is no outbound ACL
on the Inside interface of the router.

In my outside ASA ACL I have a permit any host PUBLIC IP #2 eq 25

Am I missing something?

K.J. 44 wrote:
> My policy NAT does not appear to be working at all...
>
> I was having trouble with it as seen in my previoues post
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.dcom.sys.cisco/browse_thread/thread/fa570f250a67a170
>
> So I gave up on that approach and I change my ACL to
>
> access-list policy_PAT_server extended permit ip host SERVER PRIVATE IP
> any
>
> nat (inside) 1 access-list policy_PAT_server
> global (outside) 1 PUBLIC IP #2
>
> my other NAT is:
>
> nat (inside) Private Subnet (includes PCs and server)
> global (outside) PUBLIC IP #1
>
> Everything is getting translated by the second NAT statement!
> 
> Is there something wrong here?
> 
> Thanks.

0
Reply K 9/14/2006 4:05:32 PM


1 Replies
457 Views

(page loaded in 0.048 seconds)

Similiar Articles:













7/25/2012 7:32:30 PM


Reply: