DynDNS and NAT

Similar Questions

• client ipSec VPN and NAT on the router Cisco = FAIL

  I have a Cisco 3825 router that I have set up for a Cisco VPN ipSec client.  The same router is NAT.

  ipSec logs, but can not reach the internal network unless NAT is disabled on the inside interface.  But I need both at the same time.

  Suggestions?

  crypto ISAKMP policy 3

  BA 3des

  preshared authentication

  Group 2

  !

  ISAKMP crypto client configuration group myclient

  key password!

  DNS 1.1.1.1

  Domain name

  pool myVPN

  ACL 111

  !

  !

  Crypto ipsec transform-set esp-3des esp-md5-hmac RIGHT

  !

  Crypto-map dynamic dynmap 10

  Set transform-set RIGHT

  market arriere-route

  !

  !
  list of card crypto clientmap client VPN - AAA authentication
  card crypto clientmap AAA - VPN isakmp authorization list
  client configuration address map clientmap crypto answer
  10 ipsec-isakmp crypto map clientmap Dynamics dynmap
  !

  interface Loopback0
  IP 10.88.0.1 255.255.255.0
  !
  interface GigabitEthernet0/0
  / / DESC it's external interface

  IP 192.168.168.5 255.255.255.0
  NAT outside IP
  IP virtual-reassembly
  automatic duplex
  automatic speed
  media type rj45
  clientmap card crypto
  !
  interface GigabitEthernet0/1

  / / DESC it comes from inside interface
  10.0.1.10 IP address 255.255.255.0
  IP nat inside<=================ipSec client="" connects,="" but="" cannot="" reach="" interior="" network="" unless="" this="" is="">
  IP virtual-reassembly
  the route cache same-interface IP
  automatic duplex
  automatic speed
  media type rj45

  !

  IP local pool myVPN 10.88.0.2 10.88.0.10

  p route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 192.168.168.1
  IP route 10.0.0.0 255.255.0.0 10.0.1.4
  !

  IP nat inside source list 1 interface GigabitEthernet0/0 overload
  !
  access-list 1 permit 10.0.0.0 0.0.255.255
  access-list 111 allow ip 10.0.0.0 0.0.255.255 10.88.0.0 0.0.0.255
  access-list 111 allow ip 10.88.0.0 0.0.0.255 10.0.0.0 0.0.255.255

  Hello

  I think that you need to configure the ACL default PAT so there first statemts 'decline' for traffic that is NOT supposed to be coordinated between the local network and VPN pool

  For example, to do this kind of configuration, ACL and NAT

  Note access-list 100 NAT0 customer VPN
  

  access-list 100 deny ip 10.0.1.0 0.0.0.255 10.88.0.0 0.0.0.255
  

  Note access-list 100 default PAT for Internet traffic
  

  access-list 100 permit ip 10.0.1.0 0.0.0.255 ay

  overload of IP nat inside source list 100 interface GigabitEthernet0/0

  
  EDIT: seem to actually you could have more than 10 networks behind the router

  Then you could modify the ACL on this

  Note access-list 100 NAT0 customer VPN
  

  access-list 100 deny ip 10.0.1.0 0.0.255.255 10.88.0.0 0.0.0.255
  

  Note access-list 100 default PAT for Internet traffic
  

  access-list 100 permit ip 10.0.1.0 0.0.255.255 ay

  Don't forget to mark the answers correct/replys and/or useful answers to rate

  -Jouni

• Cisco ASA Site to Site VPN IPSEC and NAT question

  Hi people,

  I have a question about the two Site to Site VPN IPSEC and NAT. basically what I want to achieve is to do the following:

  ASA2 is at HQ and ASA1 is a remote site. I have no problem setting a static static is a Site to IPSEC VPN between sites. Guests residing in 10.1.0.0/16 are able to communicate with hosts in 192.168.1.0/24, but what I want is to configure the NAT with IPSEC VPN for this host to 10.1.0.0/16 will communicate with hosts in 192.168.1.0/24 with translated addresses

  Just an example:

  N2 host (10.1.0.1/16) contacted N1 192.168.1.5 with destination host say 10.23.1.5 No 192.168.1.5 (notice the last byte is the same in the present case,.5)

  The translation still for the rest of the communication (host pings ip destination host 10.23.1.6 N3 N2 not 192.168.1.6 new last byte is the same)

  It sounds a bit confusing to me, but I've seen this type of configuration before when I worked for the supplier of managed services where we have given our customers (Ipsec Site to Site VPN with NAT, don't know how it was setup)

  Basically we contact the customer via site-to-site VPN hosts but their real address were hidden and we used as translated address more high 10.23.1.0/24 instead of (real) 192.168.1.0/24, last byte must be the same.

  Grateful if someone can shed some light on this subject.

  Hello

  OK so went with the old format of NAT configuration

  It seems to me that you could do the following:

  • Configure the ASA1 with static NAT strategy
    • access-list L2LVPN-POLICYNAT allowed ip 192.168.1.0 255.255.255.0 10.1.0.0 255.255.0.0
    • public static 10.23.1.0 (inside, outside) access-list L2LVPN-POLICYNAT
  • Because the above is a static NAT of the policy, this means that the translation will be made only when the destination network is 10.1.0.0/16
  • If you have for example a PAT basic configuration to inside-> external traffic, the above NAT configuration and the custom of the actual configuration of PAT interfere with eachother
  • ASA2 side, you can normally configure NAT0 / NAT Exemption for the 10.1.0.0/16 network
    • Note of the INTERIOR-SHEEP access-list SHEEP L2LVPN
    • the permitted INSIDE SHEEP 10.1.0.0 ip access list 255.255.0.0 10.23.1.0 255.255.255.0
    • NAT (inside) 0-list of access to the INTERIOR-SHEEP
  • You will need to consider that your access-list defining the VPN encrypted L2L traffic must reflect the new NAT network
    • ASA1: allowed to access-list L2LVPN-ENCRYPTIONDOMAIN ip 10.23.1.0 255.255.255.0 10.1.0.0 255.255.0.0
    • ASA2: list L2LVPN-ENCRYPTIONDOMAIN allowed ip 10.1.0.0 access 255.255.0.0 10.23.1.0 255.255.255.0

  I could test this configuration to work tomorrow but I would like to know if it works.

  Please rate if this was helpful

  -Jouni

• VPN IPSec with no. - Nat and Nat - No.

  On a 6.3 (5) PIX 515 that I currently have an IPSec VPN configured with no. - nat, using all public IPs internally and on the remote control. Can I add two hosts to the field of encryption that have private IP addresses and NAT to the same public IP in the address card Crypto? What commands would be involved in this?

  Current config:

  -------

  ipsectraffic_boston list of allowed access host ip host PublicIP11 PublicIP1

  ipsectraffic_boston list of allowed access host ip host PublicIP22 PublicIP2

  outside2_outbound_nat0_acl list of allowed access host ip host PublicIP PublicIP

  card crypto mymap 305 correspondence address ipsectraffic_boston
  mymap 305 peer IPAdd crypto card game.
  mymap 305 transform-set ESP-3DES-SHA crypto card game
  life card crypto mymap 305 set security-association seconds 86400 4608000 kilobytes

  ---------

  I would add two IP private to the 'ipsectraffic_boston access-list' and have NAT to a public IP address, as the remote site asks that I don't use the private IP. This would save the effort to add a public IP address to my internal host.

  Thank you

  Dan

  Hello

  If for example you have an internal host 192.168.1.1 and you want NAT public IP 200.1.1.1 it address

  You can make a static NAT:

  (in, out) static 200.1.1.1 192.168.1.1

  And include the 200.1.1.1 in crypto ACL.

  Federico.

• Windows 7 Embedded - routing and NAT functions

  Hi all

  I am about to install a Windows Embedded solution in a material that has a built-in switch.

  This material will be essentially two different networks, LAN (integrated switch) and WAN (independent ethernet port). (Please note, WAN in this case is not the internet, it's another network with a different subnet, where the only link is this Windows machine)

  I need to know if it is possible to activate the functions of routing in Windows Embedded 7 much in the same way, you can do in Windows 7 Ultimate:
  Reference-> wikihow com/Enable-IP-routing

  The main objective is to be able to activate the NAT function where I can the port before any requests from the network individuals of the ports in the LAN or WAN IP.

  I have attached an explanatory diagram of what I need, I hope is clear, I'm not very good in this kind of drawing diagrams...

  Hope someone can help me in this.

  
  This issue is beyond the scope of this site and must be placed on Technet or MSDN
  http://social.technet.Microsoft.com/forums/en-us/home

  http://social.msdn.Microsoft.com/forums/en-us/home

• Split of static traffic between the VPN and NAT

  Hi all

  We have a VPN from Site to Site that secures all traffic to and from 10.160.8.0/24 to/from 10.0.0.0/8.  It's for everything - including Internet traffic.  However, there is one exception (of course)...

  The part that I can't make it work is if traffic comes from the VPN (10.0.0.0/8) of 10.160.8.5 (on 80 or 443), then the return traffic must go back through the VPN.  BUT, if traffic 80 or 443 comes from anywhere else (Internet via X.X.X.X which translates to 10.160.8.5), so there need to be translated réécrirait Internet via Gig2.

  I have the following Setup (tried to have just the neccessarry lines)...

  interface GigabitEthernet2

  address IP Y.Y.Y.Y 255.255.255.0! the X.X.X.X and Y.Y.Y.Y are in the same subnet

  address IP X.X.X.X 255.255.255.0 secondary

  NAT outside IP

  card crypto ipsec-map-S2S

  interface GigabitEthernet4.2020

  Description 2020

  encapsulation dot1Q 2020

  IP 10.160.8.1 255.255.255.0

  IP nat inside

  IP virtual-reassembly

  IP nat inside source list interface NAT-output GigabitEthernet2 overload

  IP nat inside source static tcp 10.160.8.5 80 80 X.X.X.X map route No. - NAT extensible

  IP nat inside source static tcp 10.160.8.5 443 443 X.X.X.X map route No. - NAT extensible

  NAT-outgoing extended IP access list

  refuse 10.160.8.5 tcp host 10.0.0.0 0.0.0.255 eq www

  refuse 10.160.8.5 tcp host 10.0.0.0 0.0.0.255 eq 443

  permit tcp host 10.160.8.5 all eq www

  permit tcp host 10.160.8.5 any eq 443

  No. - NAT extended IP access list

  refuse 10.160.8.5 tcp host 10.0.0.0 0.0.0.255 eq www

  refuse 10.160.8.5 tcp host 10.0.0.0 0.0.0.255 eq 443

  allow an ip

  route No. - NAT allowed 10 map

  corresponds to the IP no. - NAT

  With the above configuration, we can get to the Internet 10.160.8.5, but cannot cross it over the VPN tunnel (from 10.200.0.0/16).  If I remove the two commands «ip nat inside source static...» ', then the opposite that happens - I can get then to 10.160.8.5 it VPN tunnel but I now can't get to it from the Internet.

  How can I get both?  It seems that when I hit the first NAT instruction (overload Gig2) that 'decline' in the list of ACL-NAT-outgoing punts me out of this statement of NAT.  It can process the following statement of NAT (one of the 'ip nat inside source static... ") but does not seem to"deny"it in the NON - NAT ACL me punt out of this statement of NAT.  That's my theory anyway (maybe something is happening?)

  If this work like that or I understand something correctly?  It's on a router Cisco's Cloud Services (CSR 1000v).

  Thank you!

  Your netmask is bad for your 10.0.0.0/8. I worry not about the port/protocol or since that can screw you up. A better way to do it would be to deny all IP vpn traffic.

  NAT-outgoing extended IP access list

  deny ip 10.160.8.0 0.0.0.0.255 10.0.0.0 0.255.255.255

  ...

  No. - NAT extended IP access list

  deny ip 10.160.8.0 0.0.0.0.255 10.0.0.0 0.255.255.255

  allow an ip

  Doc:

  Router to router IPSec with NAT and Cisco Secure VPN Client overload

  Thank you

  Brendan

• ASA firewall and Nat

  Hi to everyone.

  I have a firewall asa with the external interface pointing to a router on the subnet 192.168.1.0

  And the inside of the 192.168.0.0 subnet interface

  I want to know if is required to configure the Nat object between the two interface or is not a prerequisite to have connectivity to the Internet behind the asa in the LAN segment

  Thank you all!

  Hello

  It is not necessary to configure the NAT on the SAA, providing your gateway router knows how to route the packets intended for your home network and routers NAT ACL can be configured to include your home subnet.

  If you have a router in bridge base that can not configure static routes or dynamic routing and cannot have its edited NAT policy, then you need to configure NAT on the SAA.

  see you soon,

  SEB.

• By PAT and NAT VPN

  We have a place where you want to set up a tunnel VPN to our headquarters.

  In this place, there is a router that PAT (NAT overloading), and then a few jumps more, there is a firewall that makes the NAT.

  Is this could pose a problem for the VPN tunnel?

  Here's a "pattern" of what looks like the connection.

  Customer--> PAT - router-->--> Internet--> CVPN3005 NAT firewall

  I hope you can provide me with an answer.

  VPN tunnel will not work in your scenario. NAT second change address and the ports you want to use for the vpn tunnel. So the port 500 wil be translated to top port and will be rejected at HQ.

• VRF aware IPSEC and NAT

  Hello world.

  I ' am having a Hub router and 2 routers Spoke with LAN - IP - address range overlap.

  ->-10.47.1.0/24 routerA

  /

  172.16.1.0 - VRFR

  \

  -> RouterB-10.47.1.0/24

  I use road maps to get the different local host for the VRF different side of the hub (no problem)

  I use the VRF aware IPSEC functionality to get to the different networks - talk without nat (no problem)

  My main question is that I have to do nat on the router HUB - I need to translate the host on the HUB - local LAN IP-addresses defined by the different LAN talk Administraors.

  These NAT-ranges may be different / might overlap for the different VRF.

  My problem is that I have no idea how to do to get NAT traffic ' ed correctly (after the road-map, before IPSEC).

  If you have an idea / if you solved the problem

  -I would be grateful for a hint of /Clue / THE Solution.

  Thanks in advance

  Jarle

  Hi Nelly,

  I finally found a router to test on it. I'm still trying to make it work with a single site without NAT. Without success so far, the card encryption is not triggered.

  Question: what this line do exactly? IP route vrf VRF1 10.47.2.0 255.255.255.0 200.200.200.1 global

  I guess that's only in the anticipation of your originating stuff.

  In a NAT environment, no, do you still need an ip route vrf command?

  What is the result of your sh ip vrf interface?

  Is this ok for the vrf to be associated only to the loopback interface?

  No clue on how to solve this?

  Regarding your last comment, your crypto card should be ok. Packets are translated before being treated by the encryption engine. See the link

  http://www.Cisco.com/warp/public/556/5.html

  I would try

  interface Ethernet0/0

  IP nat inside

  interface Ethernet1/0

  NAT outside IP

  IP nat inside source static network 10.47.1.0 10.47.2.0/24 VRF1 vrf

  Thank you

  Michel

• PIX of migration of AAS and Nat-control

  If I disable Nat-control, does that mean that incoming traffic via my external interface to a routable subnet on a DMZ is not subject to the stateful inspection?

  Hi Jim

  No it's not. You should always allow traffic with access lists, and when a connection is made from the outside to the demilitarized zone, it will always automatically be entered in the status table.

  NAT and stateful inspection are 2 different things.

  HTH

  Jon

• Tunnel VPN and NAT

  Hello. I'm creating a tunnel VPN IPSec LAN - to - LAN of my ASA5510 to another network but met an obstacle bit. My counterpart on the other side has informed me that he already has a VPN tunnel to another company that has the same IP range as my network(10.100.16.0 /24) and can not create the tunnel.

  I was wondering is it possible to use NAT on the VPN tunnel so that traffic that goes from my network over the VPN tunnel gets translated and my counterpart on the other side sees this reflects the range of IP addresses?

  Thanks in advance for any help.

  Hello

  Yes, you can use the same address you already use for internet access.

  Just update your list of access crypto to reflect the new address and to ensure that the third party did the same.

  Jon

• RV180 rules of access and NAT

  OK, I have a RV180 that I'm going to have some problems with access rules and one to one NAT.

  What I have is very basic with regard to needs. Outgoing Internet flows very well.

  I have an FTP server that does not use the WAN interface for the public IP address, so I created a One to One private NAT range Begin 192.168.8.28 for the inside address. I then enter the public IP 1.1.1.1 set the length of the range to 1 and the FTP service (also tried everything) and then saved.

  In my access rules I created and rule of incoming traffic always allow ANY for FTP

  192.168.8.28 is sent to the Server Local (DNAT IP)

  Use another WAN IP address is active and set to 1.1.1.1 and the rule is enabled

  No joy in the FTP connection and I don't see anything in the papers, showing the blocked port. What I'm missing here?

  After you configure a rule one by one, the outbound traffic is allowed by default and incoming traffic is allowed by the services defined in the one-to-one NAT rule.

• RVS4000 and NAT

  Just recently bought a RVS4000 to take the place of an old NetGear FVS336, who took in charge of multiple translations of NAT. It seems that the RVS4000 does not support this, other models in the line of small business support this? I only need this for a backup Internet connection so I'm not really looking to go crazy with the cost.

  I would recommend the RV220w. It's a wireless router, however, you can disable the wireless radio if it's something you don't need. It will allow individuals NAT and LAN gigabit ports. Here is a link to the interface.

  http://www.Cisco.com/Web/SBTG/gui_mockups/RV220W_v1/home.htm

  Blake

• ASA5505 SSL AnyConnect VPN and NAT Reverse Path failure

  I worked on it for a while and just have not found a solution yet.

  I have a Cisco ASA5505 Setup at home and I try to use the AnyConnect VPN client to it.  I followed the example of ASA 8.x split Tunnel but still miss me something.

  My home network is 10.170.x.x and I install the VPN address to 10.170.13.x pool I have a Windows workstation running at 10.170.0.6, printers 10.170.0.20 and 21 and inside the router itself is 10.170.0.1

  I can connect from the outside and am assigned an IP address of 10.170.13.10, but when I try to access network resources via ICMP or open a web page, the newspaper of the ASDM shows a bunch of this:

  5. January 27, 2010 | 10: 33:37 | 305013 | 10.170.255.255 | 137. Asymmetrical NAT rules matched for flows forward and backward; Connection for udp src outside:10.170.13.10/137 dst inside:10.170.255.255/137 refused due to path failure reverse that of NAT
  5. January 27, 2010 | 10: 33:36 | 305013 | 10.170.255.255 | 137. Asymmetrical NAT rules matched for flows forward and backward; Connection for udp src outside:10.170.13.10/137 dst inside:10.170.255.255/137 refused due to path failure reverse that of NAT
  5. January 27, 2010 | 10: 33: 35 | 305013 | 10.170.255.255 | 137. Asymmetrical NAT rules matched for flows forward and backward; Connection for udp src outside:10.170.13.10/137 dst inside:10.170.255.255/137 refused due to path failure reverse that of NAT
  5. January 27, 2010 | 10: 33:34 | 305013 | 10.170.0.6 | Asymmetrical NAT rules matched for flows forward and backward; Connection for icmp src, dst outside: 10.170.13.10 inside: 10.170.0.6 (type 8, code 0) rejected due to the failure of reverse path of NAT
  5. January 27, 2010 | 10:33:30 | 305013 | 10.170.255.255 | 137. Asymmetrical NAT rules matched for flows forward and backward; Connection for udp src outside:10.170.13.10/137 dst inside:10.170.255.255/137 refused due to path failure reverse that of NAT
  5. January 27, 2010 | 10: 33:29 | 305013 | 10.170.255.255 | 137. Asymmetrical NAT rules matched for flows forward and backward; Connection for udp src outside:10.170.13.10/137 dst inside:10.170.255.255/137 refused due to path failure reverse that of NAT
  5. January 27, 2010 | 10: 33:28 | 305013 | 10.170.255.255 | 137. Asymmetrical NAT rules matched for flows forward and backward; Connection for udp src outside:10.170.13.10/137 dst inside:10.170.255.255/137 refused due to path failure reverse that of NAT
  5. January 27, 2010 | 10: 33:28 | 305013 | 10.170.0.6 | Asymmetrical NAT rules matched for flows forward and backward; Connection for icmp src, dst outside: 10.170.13.10 inside: 10.170.0.6 (type 8, code 0) rejected due to the failure of reverse path of NAT
  5. January 27, 2010 | 10:33:23 | 305013 | 10.170.0.6 | Asymmetrical NAT rules matched for flows forward and backward; Connection for icmp src, dst outside: 10.170.13.10 inside: 10.170.0.6 (type 8, code 0) rejected due to the failure of reverse path of NAT
  5. January 27, 2010 | 10:33:17 | 305013 | 10.170.0.6 | Asymmetrical NAT rules matched for flows forward and backward; Connection for icmp src, dst outside: 10.170.13.10 inside: 10.170.0.6 (type 8, code 0) rejected due to the failure of reverse path of NAT
  5. January 27, 2010 | 10: 33: 13 | 305013 | 10.170.0.6 | Asymmetrical NAT rules matched for flows forward and backward; Connection for icmp src, dst outside: 10.170.13.10 inside: 10.170.0.6 (type 8, code 0) rejected due to the failure of reverse path of NAT
  5. January 27, 2010 | 10:33:07 | 305013 | 10.170.0.6 | Asymmetrical NAT rules matched for flows forward and backward; Connection for icmp src, dst outside: 10.170.13.10 inside: 10.170.0.6 (type 8, code 0) rejected due to the failure of reverse path of NAT

  I tried several things with NAT, but were not able to go beyond that.  Does anyone mind looking at my config running and help me with this?  Thanks a bunch!

  -Tim

  Couple to check points.

  name 10.17.13.0 UFP-VPN-pool looks like it should be the name 10.170.13.0 UFP-VPN-pool

  inside_nat0_outbound to access extended list ip allow list zero 255.255.0.0 255.255.255.0 UFP-VPN-pool

  Looks like that one

  inside_nat0_outbound to list extended ip access list zero UFP-VPN-pool 255.255.255.0 255.255.255.0 allow

• PIX and NAT - T

  Hi all

  I have a small question. I have a couple of users who use routers to connect by VPN to our pix that authenticates by a RAY for L2TP connections. I enabled the NAT - T on our PIX and they may not always connect. Is there anything I might have missed. I checked most of the posts in this forum do not see anything else, I should have activated.

  Can anyone help?

  Thanks in advance.

  Michael

  A tunnel of Lan-to-Lan of a router in a PIX does not NAT - T, unless there is NAT devices between two end points. If this is the case, you must ensure that both the software both from the end of rehbeh points devices support this capability. An example of a router to tunnel PIX IPSec configuration is available at http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/hw/vpndevc/ps2030/products_configuration_example09186a0080094498.shtml

  Another example that deals with the same configuration with NAT is available at

  http://www.Cisco.com/en/us/Tech/tk583/TK372/technologies_configuration_example09186a0080094a87.shtml