NAT and WS-C3650-24TS-L

Similar Questions

• Order of procedure SonicWALL for routing, NAT and policies

  I'm confused on the prescription that the sonicwall verifies a package.  The way I heard the order, it will:

  (1) check against the access rules,

  (2) check against NAT Polies

  (3) check the routing.

  Installation program:

  Subnet point of VPN endpoint - Internet - SW NSA 2400 (VPN) - sub-network B (from C subnet)

  A subnet is 10.1.100.x/24

  Subnet B is consists of three IPs, 192.168.99.4,.50, and 109.

  Subnet C is contains the host IPs 192.168.13.4,.50, and 109.

  I VPN configured to allow traffic from 10.1.100.x to the hosts on the subnet B, what NAT and the host subnet C.  This method works more large, is not a problem.

  I need to reduce access to certain ports.  Once I set access restrictions in the port, the firewall blocks ALL.

  When I look at a screenshot of packets when traffic is blocked, I see the following:

  Source 10.1.100.5--> 192.168.99.4 accepted

  Source 10.1.100.5--> 192.168.13.4 refused.

  Block of code indicates that it is because of politics.  However the policy review should have been checked and checked already.  If I change the VPN policy to represent both sides of the NAT (ie. 192.168.99.4 and 192.168.13.4) then passes the traffic.

  If anyone can explain what is happening?

  I tried to look through some KB SonicWall has publicly available articles. But I did not see anything that doesn't seem to help. In this case, I think you might want to give SonicWall support a call.

  https://support.software.Dell.com/manage-service-request

  They can help to look over your configurations and see if we have to make changes. They should also be able to answer your technical questions about how the packets are received or managed.

• IPSec Tunnel between Cisco 2801 and Netscren 50 with NAT and static

  Hello

  My problem isn't really the IPSec connection between two devices (it is already done...) But my problem is that I have a mail server on the site of Cisco, who have a static NAT from inside to outside. Due to the static NAT, I do not see the server in the VPN tunnel. I found a document that almost describes the problem:

  "Configuration of a router IPSEC Tunnel private-to-private network with NAT and static" (Document ID 14144)

  NAT takes place before the encryption verification!

  In this document, the solution is 'routing policy' using the loopback interface. But, how can I handle this with the Netscreen firewall. Someone has an idea?

  Thanks for any help

  Best regards

  Heiko

  Hello

  Try to change your static NAT with static NAT based policy.

  That is to say the static NAT should not be applicable for VPN traffic

  permissible static route map 1

  corresponds to the IP 104

  access-list 104 refuse host ip 10.1.110.10 10.1.0.0 255.255.0.0

  access-list 104 allow the host ip 10.1.110.10 all

  IP nat inside source static 10.1.110.10 81.222.33.90 map of static route

  HTH

  Kind regards

  GE.

• Clarification of authentication PIX NAT and BGP

  Hi all

  I did some tests on PIX and crossing this area of BGP traffic.

  When I configure the PIX to do no config NAT (NAT 0) and configure a BGP session between two routers (one inside) and the other on the outside net everything works fine.

  When I configure BGP authentication, I may add the keyword "norandomseq" NAT and STATIC commands cause BGP auth embedded TCP header for authentication information. It's OK.

  But when I reconfigure the PIX to make real NAT between the inside and the outside network and reconfigure my routers, BGP session doesn't happen if BGP authentication has been disabled. If I enable authentication BGP, I had errors of MD5 authentication on routers. (Note "norandomseq" is enabled for NAT and STATIC instructions)

  Now my question is BGP unsupported for NAT on PIX sessions? (for my tests, it has worked for NAT 0 config, also all the examples that I always found working with NAT 0 config)

  I think the problem is that the TCP pseudo-header changes to the NAT device and therefore it will never work right? Or is there any correction internal bgp which should fix this? I think it's almost impossible that this is known with the password simple bgp, right?

  Concerning

  Michael

  Your reasoning is dead the. BGP authentication works like this: the sending peer BGP takes and MD5 hash of the TCP header before sending the package and includes this hash in the TCP header option. The BGP receiver receives the packet and also did a MD5 hash of the TCP header. Then, it compares its value to the value sent by the sender of BGP. If they match, all right. If they fail, the packet is ignored and you get error messages, did you see.

  Because the NAT will change the address source TCP, the TCP header will be changed which should bring a different MD5 hash for the receiver that the sender originally sent.

  BGP peer by a PIX authtenticatio is supported only in a Nat 0 or static identity with the norandomseq option is enabled.

  Make sense?

  Scott

• Issue of ASA NAT and routing

  Hello

  I have a question about NAT and routing on the SAA. I'm relatively new to ASA and don't know if it works or not. I have a pool of public IP (209.x.x.x/28) that routes my ISP to the external interface of my ASA. IP was assigned address for the outside of the ASA is an address of 206.x.x.2/24 with a default GW of 206.x.x.1. I intend using NAT to allow my web/mail servers on the DMZ (192.168.x.x) use 209.x.x.x addresses. However, I do know how to make it work since I'm not arping on any interface for 209.x.x.x addresses as they will be sent to the 206.x.x.2 address by the ISP. Can I just set up a translation NAT (on the external interface?) of the 209.x.x.x on 192.168.x.x address and the ASA will figure it out?

  Thanks for the help.

  Todd

  The ASa will figure it out, he will answer ARP queries for all that he has set up in a "static" command As long as th PSIA routes 209.x.x.x directly to the ASA addresses then it should all work fine.

  You just need to add lines like the following:

  static (dmz, external) 209.x.x.x netmask 255.255.255.255 192.168.x.x

  for each of your internal servers in the DMZ. Then an access-list to allow only HTTP/SMTP/etc through these addresses 209.x.x.x.

  list of allowed inbound tcp access any host 209.x.x.x eq smtp

  list of allowed inbound tcp access any host 209.y.y.y eq http

  Access-group interface incoming outside

• NAT and VMware View

  I am

  try again using VMware View, where a person uses a VPN to

  connect to my view of the Park, but my connection to the server is running NAT, and

  the client tries to connect in my Park he cannot get the virtual

  machine. Are there restrictions? Any tips?

  If you have found this information useful, please consider awarding points to 'Correct' or 'Useful'*.

  Exactly THAT PCOIP do not work on the Security server.  If your using VPN and connect to a broker internal conection it should work good as new NAT could shake things.    Should be a simple test however.

  If you have found this device or any other useful post please consider the use of buttons useful/correct to award points

  Twitter: http://twitter.com/mittim12

• Types of NAT and security

  Question: What should I do to get the NAT on my PlayStation 1 type while keeping the type NAT 2 on my other devices?

  Hello! I connected an AirPort Express into my modem. The AirPort Express gives me type NAT 2 on my units, which is good. However, my PlayStation 4 has a lot of problems connecting to games online with this NAT type. I would get the type of NAT 1 on my PlayStation, while keeping type NAT 2 on the rest of my devices for security reasons.

  The two options I can imagine are the following:

  1. Changing the type of PlayStations NAT without compromising the security of other devices is directly connect the PlayStation to the modem with an ethernet cable. Again, I would not a cable through half of my house, and so I would like to know if there are other options.
  2. Buy a new separate router and have two totally airtight networks, then use port forwarding to get NAT type 1 on one of the routers.

  Change the NAT type to open (1) for all devices is not an option, because it will change the security settings.

  Please see the following Tip of an airport users for more details on the types of NAT for PS 3/4 consoles with AirPort base stations.

• Access to services: conflict NAT and VPN

  Hi people!

  I encountered a problem with external access to local services of:
  (a) remote clients (port open on the side WAN)
  (b) the remote sites (through IPsec tunnels)

  Here's a topology:

  

  EXPLANATIONS

  FW1 (actually from TMG 2010) overload NAT of preforms.

  The service in question (for example tcp 9999) is published on 192.168.100.0/24 via static NAT translation, which is accessible from the network.

  HQ1 is a border router (cisco 2921). It also performs NAT overload for public addresses. (Other than cisco) Branch1 also performs NAT overload.

  All traffic between the headquarters and the remote site is allowed. The service is accessible from the remote site.

  PROBLEM

  I want to allow access to the service for an external user (remote user). I do the following configuration:

  IP nat inside source static tcp 192.168.100.2 2.2.2.2 9999 9999 extensible

  After this command remote user is able to access the service by public IP, BUT the site's users remote losing it. If I roll back with

  No nat ip inside the source static tcp 192.168.100.2 2.2.2.2 9999 9999 extensible

  then access to the remote site is restored, and remote user lose again. Seems that it is connected with the static NAT translations.

  How can I make it work in both cases of simulteniously? Both for the remote site and the remote user.

  Thank you!

  You must use a map of the route with your static NAT configuration.

  Recently answered a question for the same thing, please visit this link and if you have any questions please come back.

  https://supportforums.Cisco.com/discussion/12544291/IPSec-IP-NAT-inside-source-static

  Jon

• VRF-lite, NAT and route-leak

  Hello, community. I'm trying to reproduce the installation with two clients (R1 and R2) program, router PE (R3) and common services (R4).

  Here is the configuration:

  R1:

  interface Loopback0

  IP 10.10.1.1 255.255.255.255

  !

  interface FastEthernet1/0

  192.168.15.1 IP address 255.255.255.0

  !

  IP route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 192.168.15.5

  R2:

  interface Loopback0

  10.10.2.2 IP address 255.255.255.255

  !

  interface FastEthernet1/0

  IP 192.168.16.1 255.255.255.192

  !

  IP route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 192.168.16.5

  R3:

  IP vrf VRF1

  RD 1:1

  export of road-objective 1:1

  import of course-target 1:1

  !

  IP vrf VRF2

  Rd 2:2

  Route target export 2:2

  import of course-target 2:2

  !

  interface FastEthernet0/0

  R1 description

  IP vrf forwarding VRF1

  IP 192.168.15.5 255.255.255.192

  IP nat inside

  IP virtual-reassembly

  !

  interface FastEthernet0/1

  R2 description

  IP vrf forwarding VRF2

  IP 192.168.16.5 255.255.255.192

  IP nat inside

  IP virtual-reassembly

  !

  interface FastEthernet1/0

  R4 description

  IP 1.1.1.1 255.255.255.0

  NAT outside IP

  IP virtual-reassembly

  !

  IP route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 1.1.1.2

  IP route vrf VRF1 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 FastEthernet1/0 overall 1.1.1.2

  IP route vrf VRF1 10.10.0.0 255.255.0.0 192.168.15.1

  IP route vrf VRF2 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 FastEthernet1/0 overall 1.1.1.2

  IP route vrf VRF2 10.10.0.0 255.255.0.0 192.168.16.1

  !

  IP nat inside source list 15 interface FastEthernet1/0 vrf VRF1 overload

  VRF2 of the IP nat inside source list 16 interface FastEthernet1/0 vrf, overload

  !

  access-list 15 allow 192.0.0.0 0.255.255.255

  access-list 15 allow 10.10.0.0 0.0.255.255

  access-list 16 allow 192.0.0.0 0.255.255.255

  access-list 16 allow 10.10.0.0 0.0.255.255

  R4:

  interface Loopback0

  IP 10.10.10.10 address 255.255.255.255

  !

  interface FastEthernet0/0

  1.1.1.2 IP 255.255.255.0

  !

  IP route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 1.1.1.1

  The configuration is not operational.

  R1 #ping 192.168.15.5

  Type to abort escape sequence.

  Send 5, echoes ICMP 100 bytes to 192.168.15.5, wait time is 2 seconds:

  !!!!!

  Success rate is 100 per cent (5/5), round-trip min/avg/max = 68/89/116 ms

  R1 #ping 192.168.15.5 source l0

  Type to abort escape sequence.

  Send 5, echoes ICMP 100 bytes to 192.168.15.5, wait time is 2 seconds:

  Packet sent with the address 10.10.1.1 source

  !!!!!

  Success rate is 100 per cent (5/5), round-trip min/avg/max = 68/86/92 ms

  R1 #ping 1.1.1.1 source l0

  Type to abort escape sequence.

  Send 5, echoes ICMP 100 bytes of 1.1.1.1, time-out is 2 seconds:

  Packet sent with the address 10.10.1.1 source

  .!!!!

  Success rate is 80% (4/5), round-trip min/avg/max = 292/357/400 ms

  R1 #ping 1.1.1.2 source l0

  Type to abort escape sequence.

  Send 5, echoes ICMP 100 bytes to 1.1.1.2, time-out is 2 seconds:

  Packet sent with the address 10.10.1.1 source

  .!!!!

  Success rate is 80% (4/5), round-trip min/avg/max = 216/187/160 ms

  R1 #ping 10.10.10.10 source l0

  Type to abort escape sequence.

  Send 5, echoes ICMP 100 bytes of 10.10.10.10, time-out is 2 seconds:

  Packet sent with the address 10.10.1.1 source

  .....

  Success rate is 0% (0/5)

  I can't ping R4 loopback address ("shared resource" or also known as the "common service")

  It is the same with R2 (second customer).

  But I can still ping loopback R4 of R3:

  R3 #ping 10.10.10.10

  Type to abort escape sequence.

  Send 5, echoes ICMP 100 bytes of 10.10.10.10, time-out is 2 seconds:

  !!!!!

  Success rate is 100 per cent (5/5), round-trip min/avg/max = 40/88/116 ms

  It's the routing on R3 table:

  R3 #sh ip road | start the gateway

  Gateway of last resort is 1.1.1.2 network 0.0.0.0

  1.0.0.0/24 is divided into subnets, subnets 1

  C 1.1.1.0 is directly connected, FastEthernet1/0

  S * 0.0.0.0/0 [1/0] via 1.1.1.2

  R3 #sh ip route vrf VRF1 | start the gateway

  Gateway of last resort is 1.1.1.2 network 0.0.0.0

  192.168.15.0/26 is divided into subnets, subnets 1

  C 192.168.15.0 is directly connected, FastEthernet0/0

  10.0.0.0/16 is divided into subnets, subnets 1

  S 10.10.0.0 [1/0] via 192.168.15.1

  S * 0.0.0.0/0 [1/0] via 1.1.1.2, FastEthernet1/0

  R3 #sh ip route vrf VRF2 | start the gateway

  Gateway of last resort is 1.1.1.2 network 0.0.0.0

  10.0.0.0/16 is divided into subnets, subnets 1

  S 10.10.0.0 [1/0] via 192.168.16.1

  192.168.16.0/26 is divided into subnets, subnets 1

  C 192.168.16.0 is directly connected, FastEthernet0/1

  S * 0.0.0.0/0 [1/0] via 1.1.1.2, FastEthernet1/0

  So the question is what is the cause of the problem? How to troubleshoot? What is the troubleshooting steps?

  Hi Eugene Khabarov

  His does not work since the address IP of Destination that represents common Services is be routed locally to the THIS itself. That's the problem here. We must ensure that the Destination subnet is not pointing to what is happening here.

  R4:

  interface Loopback0

  IP 10.10.10.10 address 255.255.255.255

  !

  R3-VRF1

  S 10.10.0.0 [1/0] via 192.168.15.1

  Concerning

  Verdier

• Policy Nat and IPSec tunnel

  Hello

  I have a Cisco IOS router and you want to configure an IPSec tunnel between myself and the client.  Unfortunately, we have two overlapping of 10 network IP addresses.

  Is it possible for me to just Nat addresses IP on my side or should the customer Nat as well?

  I have configured NAT on the inside of the interface for 10.134.206.1 to 192.168.156.6 so that Nat happens before that packages are encrypted in the tunnel, however tunnel is not coming.    The client uses a sonic firewall and allowed their 10.91.0.0/16 network 192.168.156.0/24.

  See attachment

  Kind regards

  They are wrong to installation.  Remote local networks are not 10.134.206.0 and 10.134.206/42.  It is simply your public IP address.

• One-to-one NAT and small business routers

  Hello all, can anyone tell me if there is any router for small businesses that offer a NAT?

  Here's what I do: I have several IP addresses public Qwest has given me. I have two servers that provide e-mail and web hosting for two different areas. I want to put the client machines on a LAN VIRTUAL (VLAN Z) and assign a public IP address (to separate traffic from the server). I want to put every server on its own LAN VIRTUAL (VLAN & XY) and assign to each its own public IP address server. I need the router to be able to provide a firewall and port forwarding for each VLAN. I also need to be able to carry traffic between VLANs for VLAN Z customers may access their e-mail and websites on VLANs X and Y. I have also need to be able to send DNS traffic between the VLANS so each server can provide resolution of names for their respective areas.

  So, is this possible with a small business router or I have to watch something different? I am pretty sure that this configuration is not possible with my current Cisco RVS4000. What it boils down to is that I need a router that is able to have multiple public IP addresses on the same interface and pass the public addresses to subnets private VLAN. It would be a NAT, as I understand it... right?

  Any help is greatly appreciated!

  Hi Taylor, please use our forum, my name is Johnnatan and I'm part of the community of support to small businesses. I ve seen your post and I was looking for some devices that could help you, these small business router supports the functionality you were missing, the one-to-one nat, also the routing features, you see the list of routers Rv here

  http://www.Cisco.com/en/us/products/ps9923/products_data_sheets_list.html

  I chose two models that may be useful for you:

  Rv180

  http://www.Cisco.com/en/us/prod/collateral/routers/ps10907/ps9923/ps11995/C78-697397_data_sheet.html

  Rv220

  http://www.Cisco.com/en/us/prod/collateral/routers/ps9923/ps11025/data_sheet_c78-630461.html

  I hope you find this answer useful,

  * Please answer question mark or note the fact other users can benefit from the TI *.

  Greetings,

  Johnnatan Rodriguez Miranda.

  Support of Cisco network engineer.

• NAT and PAT

  I'm looking for a very good explanation and sample of PAT and NAT. It seems that two acronyms are often interchanged.

  http://www.Cisco.com/en/us/customer/products/HW/vpndevc/ps2030/products_tech_note09186a00800b6e1a.shtml

  should give you an idea that the way in which the t pix - it.

  If your example, it totally depends on the configuration, but if you have only 1 legit external ip, you must configure pat, you have not enough addresses to nat

• NAT and vpn acl

  Hello

  I have asa 5512-x

  ASA 9.1 version 2

  ASDM version 7.2 (1)

  I'm not really good with a syntax of cisco, so I use asdm

  I created a split tunnel remote ipsec vpn with cisco vpn client

  the purpose is to allow vpn for LAN traffic

  and to allow the vpn to a public Web site traffic

  so I set the two objects and added to the exemption of split tunnel (the names of the objects: 'LAN', 'Rackspace')

  access to the local network is ok, access to a Web site does not work

  I guess I have some missing nat/ACL,

  can someone explain to me please in the most simple way to do this?

  Thank you very much

  Hello

  What is subnet

  network of the NETWORK_OBJ_172.18.0.0_26 object
  255.255.255.192 subnet 172.18.0.0

  This 'nat' configuration seems strange

  NAT (LAN, WAN1) source static Tunnel VPN VPN Tunnel static destination NETWORK_OBJ_172.18.0.0_26 NETWORK_OBJ_172.18.0.0_26 non-proxy-arp-search to itinerary

  When you see that the source for the "nat" interface is 'LAN' and source networks are those configured under "Tunnel VPN" it seems to suggest that this NAT configuration transmits traffic destined to 'LAN' and 'rackspace' to the 'LAN' interface. It is naturally very good for the subnet configured under 'LAN' , but the 'rackspace' to my knowledge is located behind an external interface of the ASA correct? But I guess I really need to know this as the subnet that I mentioned at the beginning of the post (which is used in this configuration NAT too)

  What is the interface to which the VPN users connect to? WAN1 or DSL? Although the following list what the map interface Crypto is attached

  See the crypto run map

  You can also list the output of the following command

  See the establishment of performance ip local pool

  -Jouni

• How do I know if I use NAT and PAT for internet connections

  Hello

  I have a PIX 525 6.3 and I have a stupid question... I do a show xlate and I see that I'm using PAT to internet connections... The old man FW says that we come to the internet. What command can I use to confirm this... because it looks like that to me, we use PAT and NAT not for internet connections. I'm you Cisco router and switch engineer but I now have the responsibility of PIX and I want to make sure that everything is correct.

  Thank you

  No question is a STUPID question!

  Issuing the cmd: sho xlate detail and also sho conn detail and it will show you what you are looking for.

  Hope this helps

  Jay

• Endpoints NAT and tunnel

  I have two ASA firewall on different subnets, each with their own internet connection.  An ipsec tunnel is set up between my company and another company that ends on one of my ASA firewalls.  The remote end of the tunnel will not support a second endpoint of the tunnel for redundancy.

  For this reason, I was wondering if it is possible to route the packets that establish the tunnel on the second firewall and simply NAT the source address to the address of my main firewall outside address.  The tunnel is configured to be established by interesting traffic from my business side.

  My ISP, in case my main connection goes down, you can route packets intended for my end point of tunnel to my second internet connection firewall.  I think if I can just NAT address of endpoint of the tunnel (destination address) in the address assigned to my second firewall outside interface, I could set up the tunnel in this way. Anyone know if this is supported?  I know only about 10 years ago, it wasn't but I've heard that this can be done now.

  Thank you.

  It should work.

  I saw him work like this at least in cisco equipment.

  I also think that if you see this problem with NAT, should be fixed by NAT - T (when the devices sense that there is a NAT device on the way, packages 5 and 6 for Exchange of key go to UDP 4500).

  It seems like it should work.

  Federico.