<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Config seems fine to me in Routing and SD-WAN</title>
    <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/routing-and-sd-wan/cisco-2851-nat-load-balancing-problem-is-solved/m-p/2651385#M248692</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;Config seems fine to me.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Perhaps the issue is in the ISP routers or above, they need the routes to your public IP addresses as well.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Also, remember there are several ways for the router to load balance the traffic: process-switching, fast-switching and CEF, I'm not sure but I think 2800 routers use fast-switching.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;That means that if you start sendng a lot of packets to a remote node from only one host, all of those will go through the same route.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Farther, NAT doesn't make a new translation for every packet, it also uses a cache for packets which has already been translated, so if you start a download using the public address of ISP1 for the first packet, then all of the next packets (from the same flow) will use the same IP address, even if routed through another ISP.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I know this doesn't explain why ISP2 is not working, still, I hope it helps.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Regards.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Wed, 15 Apr 2015 15:57:24 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Ricardo Munioz Cabero</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2015-04-15T15:57:24Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Cisco 2851 NAT Load Balancing Problem (is solved!)</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/routing-and-sd-wan/cisco-2851-nat-load-balancing-problem-is-solved/m-p/2651384#M248691</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;How to configure NAT load-balancing over two ISPs on Cisco 2851.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-size:14px;"&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-family:courier new,courier,monospace;"&gt;System image file is "flash:c2800nm-adventerprisek9-mz.151-4.M.bin"&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;My config (users behind the router/PAT&amp;nbsp;unable to acccess to Internet, I don't known why?!!):&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-size:14px;"&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-family:courier new,courier,monospace;"&gt;interface FastEthernet0/1/0.1101&lt;BR /&gt;&amp;nbsp;description *** INET: ISP1&amp;nbsp;***&lt;BR /&gt;&amp;nbsp;bandwidth 100000&lt;BR /&gt;&amp;nbsp;encapsulation dot1Q 1101&lt;BR /&gt;&amp;nbsp;ip address 1.1.1.2&amp;nbsp;255.255.252&lt;BR /&gt;&amp;nbsp;no ip redirects&lt;BR /&gt;&amp;nbsp;no ip unreachables&lt;BR /&gt;&amp;nbsp;no ip proxy-arp&lt;BR /&gt;&amp;nbsp;ip flow ingress&lt;BR /&gt;&amp;nbsp;ip flow egress&lt;BR /&gt;&amp;nbsp;ip nat outside&lt;BR /&gt;&amp;nbsp;ip virtual-reassembly in&lt;BR /&gt;&amp;nbsp;service-policy output POLICY-100M&lt;BR /&gt;&amp;nbsp;!&lt;BR /&gt;interface FastEthernet0/1/0.1103&lt;BR /&gt;&amp;nbsp;description *** INET: ISP2&amp;nbsp;***&lt;BR /&gt;&amp;nbsp;bandwidth 50000&lt;BR /&gt;&amp;nbsp;encapsulation dot1Q 1103&lt;BR /&gt;&amp;nbsp;ip address 2.2.2.2&amp;nbsp;255.255.255.252&lt;BR /&gt;&amp;nbsp;no ip redirects&lt;BR /&gt;&amp;nbsp;no ip unreachables&lt;BR /&gt;&amp;nbsp;no ip proxy-arp&lt;BR /&gt;&amp;nbsp;ip flow ingress&lt;BR /&gt;&amp;nbsp;ip flow egress&lt;BR /&gt;&amp;nbsp;ip nat outside&lt;BR /&gt;&amp;nbsp;ip virtual-reassembly in&lt;BR /&gt;&amp;nbsp;service-policy output POLICY-50M&lt;BR /&gt;!&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-size:14px;"&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-family:courier new,courier,monospace;"&gt;interface GigabitEthernet0/0.12&lt;BR /&gt;&amp;nbsp;description *** LAN&amp;nbsp;***&lt;BR /&gt;&amp;nbsp;encapsulation dot1Q 12&lt;BR /&gt;&amp;nbsp;ip address 172.18.253.233 255.255.255.252&lt;BR /&gt;&amp;nbsp;ip pim sparse-mode&lt;BR /&gt;&amp;nbsp;ip nat inside&lt;BR /&gt;&amp;nbsp;ip virtual-reassembly in&lt;BR /&gt;&amp;nbsp;no cdp enable&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-size:14px;"&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-family:courier new,courier,monospace;"&gt;!&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-size:14px;"&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-family:courier new,courier,monospace;"&gt;ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 1.1.1.1&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-size:14px;"&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-family:courier new,courier,monospace;"&gt;ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 2.2.2.1&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-size:14px;"&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-family:courier new,courier,monospace;"&gt;!&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-size:14px;"&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-family:courier new,courier,monospace;"&gt;ip nat pool POOL-ISP1&amp;nbsp;1.1.1.2&amp;nbsp;1.1.1.2&amp;nbsp;prefix-length 30&lt;BR /&gt;ip nat pool POOL-ISP2&amp;nbsp;2.2.2.2&amp;nbsp;2.2.2.2&amp;nbsp;prefix-length 30&lt;BR /&gt;ip nat inside source route-map RMAP-NAT-ISP1 pool&amp;nbsp;POOL-ISP1 overload&lt;BR /&gt;ip nat inside source route-map RMAP-NAT-ISP2 pool&amp;nbsp;POOL-ISP2&amp;nbsp;overload&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-size:14px;"&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-family:courier new,courier,monospace;"&gt;!&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-size:14px;"&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-family:courier new,courier,monospace;"&gt;route-map RMAP-NAT-ISP1 permit 10&lt;BR /&gt;&amp;nbsp;match ip address ACL-NAT&lt;BR /&gt;&amp;nbsp;match interface FastEthernet0/1/0.1101&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-size:14px;"&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-family:courier new,courier,monospace;"&gt;oute-map RMAP-NAT-ISP2 permit 10&lt;BR /&gt;&amp;nbsp;match ip address ACL-NAT&lt;BR /&gt;&amp;nbsp;match interface FastEthernet0/1/0.1103&lt;BR /&gt;!&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-size:14px;"&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-family:courier new,courier,monospace;"&gt;ip access-list extended ACL-NAT&lt;BR /&gt;&amp;nbsp;deny &amp;nbsp; ip object-group OBJNET-PRIVATE object-group OBJNET-PRIVATE&lt;BR /&gt;&amp;nbsp;permit ip object-group OBJNET-SR any&lt;BR /&gt;!&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;If "&lt;SPAN style="font-size:14px;"&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-family:courier new,courier,monospace;"&gt;no ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 2.2.2.1&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;"&amp;nbsp;the situation doesn't change, there is no Internet access.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;...and working config (only through one ISP only &lt;span class="lia-unicode-emoji" title=":disappointed_face:"&gt;😞&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-size:14px;"&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-family:courier new,courier,monospace;"&gt;!&amp;lt;interface config all the same,&amp;nbsp;see above&amp;gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-size:14px;"&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-family:courier new,courier,monospace;"&gt;!&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-size:14px;"&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-family:courier new,courier,monospace;"&gt;ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 1.1.1.1&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-size:14px;"&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-family:courier new,courier,monospace;"&gt;!&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-size:14px;"&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-family:courier new,courier,monospace;"&gt;ip nat pool POOL-ISP1&amp;nbsp;1.1.1.2&amp;nbsp;1.1.1.2&amp;nbsp;prefix-length 30&lt;BR /&gt;ip nat pool POOL-ISP2&amp;nbsp;2.2.2.2&amp;nbsp;2.2.2.2&amp;nbsp;prefix-length 30&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-size:14px;"&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-family:courier new,courier,monospace;"&gt;ip nat inside source list ACL-NAT pool POOL-ISP1&amp;nbsp;overload&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-size:14px;"&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-family:courier new,courier,monospace;"&gt;!&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-size:14px;"&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-family:courier new,courier,monospace;"&gt;ip access-list extended ACL-NAT&lt;BR /&gt;&amp;nbsp;deny &amp;nbsp; ip object-group OBJNET-PRIVATE object-group OBJNET-PRIVATE&lt;BR /&gt;&amp;nbsp;permit ip object-group OBJNET-SR any&lt;BR /&gt;!&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;If &amp;nbsp;add "&lt;SPAN style="font-size: 14px;"&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-family: 'courier new', courier, monospace;"&gt;ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 2.2.2.1&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;"&amp;nbsp;the situation change, there is no Internet access!.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;What is wrong in first config?! How to do:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;- if both ISPs avail.., then use both ISP for NAT for all inside hosts&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;- if one of ISPs unavail.., then use second ISP for NAT for all inside hosts&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 05 Mar 2019 09:15:10 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/routing-and-sd-wan/cisco-2851-nat-load-balancing-problem-is-solved/m-p/2651384#M248691</guid>
      <dc:creator>Anton Pestov</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2019-03-05T09:15:10Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Config seems fine to me</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/routing-and-sd-wan/cisco-2851-nat-load-balancing-problem-is-solved/m-p/2651385#M248692</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Config seems fine to me.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Perhaps the issue is in the ISP routers or above, they need the routes to your public IP addresses as well.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Also, remember there are several ways for the router to load balance the traffic: process-switching, fast-switching and CEF, I'm not sure but I think 2800 routers use fast-switching.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;That means that if you start sendng a lot of packets to a remote node from only one host, all of those will go through the same route.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Farther, NAT doesn't make a new translation for every packet, it also uses a cache for packets which has already been translated, so if you start a download using the public address of ISP1 for the first packet, then all of the next packets (from the same flow) will use the same IP address, even if routed through another ISP.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I know this doesn't explain why ISP2 is not working, still, I hope it helps.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Regards.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 15 Apr 2015 15:57:24 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/routing-and-sd-wan/cisco-2851-nat-load-balancing-problem-is-solved/m-p/2651385#M248692</guid>
      <dc:creator>Ricardo Munioz Cabero</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2015-04-15T15:57:24Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Thanks for commentsI see,</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/routing-and-sd-wan/cisco-2851-nat-load-balancing-problem-is-solved/m-p/2651386#M248693</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Thanks for comments&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I see, that router use ip CEF,&amp;nbsp;but nevertheless it doesn't solve a problem.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;This is bug? There is no solutions?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 16 Apr 2015 12:27:32 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/routing-and-sd-wan/cisco-2851-nat-load-balancing-problem-is-solved/m-p/2651386#M248693</guid>
      <dc:creator>Anton Pestov</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2015-04-16T12:27:32Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>I don´t think it´s a bug,</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/routing-and-sd-wan/cisco-2851-nat-load-balancing-problem-is-solved/m-p/2651387#M248694</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;I don´t think it´s a bug, just keep calm y perform a regular t-shoot procedure. As I said before, may be the problem is in the upstream routers.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;You should check what the router does with some packets, specially with the ones that seems to be discarded. Check if they are being routed (the packets counter should increase in the interface), then check if they are being NATed.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;You could also use identical ACLs (as you are doing) but with different names, so you can check if the counters increase in each of them.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Good luck.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 16 Apr 2015 15:15:56 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/routing-and-sd-wan/cisco-2851-nat-load-balancing-problem-is-solved/m-p/2651387#M248694</guid>
      <dc:creator>Ricardo Munioz Cabero</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2015-04-16T15:15:56Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>1. I configured identical ACL</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/routing-and-sd-wan/cisco-2851-nat-load-balancing-problem-is-solved/m-p/2651388#M248695</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;1. I configured identical ACL-NAT's and reconfigured Route-Map's:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-family: 'courier new', courier, monospace; font-size: 14px;"&gt;ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 1.1.1.1&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P style="font-size: 14.3999996185303px;"&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-size: 14px;"&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-family: 'courier new', courier, monospace;"&gt;ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 2.2.2.1&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P style="font-size: 14.3999996185303px;"&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-size: 14px;"&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-family: 'courier new', courier, monospace;"&gt;!&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P style="font-size: 14.3999996185303px;"&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-family: 'courier new', courier, monospace; font-size: 14px;"&gt;ip nat inside source route-map RMAP-NAT-ISP1 pool&amp;nbsp;POOL-ISP1 overload&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR style="font-family: 'courier new', courier, monospace; font-size: 14px;" /&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-family: 'courier new', courier, monospace; font-size: 14px;"&gt;ip nat inside source route-map RMAP-NAT-ISP2 pool&amp;nbsp;POOL-ISP2&amp;nbsp;overload&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P style="font-size: 14.3999996185303px;"&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-family: 'courier new', courier, monospace; font-size: 14px;"&gt;!&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;DIV&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-size: 14px;"&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-family: 'courier new', courier, monospace;"&gt;route-map RMAP-NAT-ISP1 permit 10&lt;BR /&gt;&amp;nbsp;match ip address ACL-NAT1&lt;BR /&gt;&amp;nbsp;match interface FastEthernet0/1/0.1101&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;P style="font-size: 14.3999996185303px;"&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-size: 14px;"&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-family: 'courier new', courier, monospace;"&gt;oute-map RMAP-NAT-ISP2 permit 10&lt;BR /&gt;&amp;nbsp;match ip address ACL-NAT2&lt;BR /&gt;&amp;nbsp;match interface FastEthernet0/1/0.1103&lt;BR /&gt;!&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P style="font-size: 14.3999996185303px;"&gt;The same problem - no Internet access,&amp;nbsp;even if "&lt;SPAN style="font-family: 'courier new', courier, monospace; font-size: 14px;"&gt;no ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 2.2.2.1&lt;/SPAN&gt;" !&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P style="font-size: 14.3999996185303px;"&gt;2.&amp;nbsp;I configured identical ACL-NAT's and reconfigured ip nat translations:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-family: 'courier new', courier, monospace; font-size: 14px;"&gt;ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 1.1.1.1&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P style="font-size: 14.3999996185303px;"&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-size: 14px;"&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-family: 'courier new', courier, monospace;"&gt;ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 2.2.2.1&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P style="font-size: 14.3999996185303px;"&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-size: 14px;"&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-family: 'courier new', courier, monospace;"&gt;!&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P style="font-size: 14.3999996185303px;"&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-family: 'courier new', courier, monospace; font-size: 14px;"&gt;ip nat inside source list ACL-NAT1&amp;nbsp;pool&amp;nbsp;POOL-ISP1 overload&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR style="font-family: 'courier new', courier, monospace; font-size: 14px;" /&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-family: 'courier new', courier, monospace; font-size: 14px;"&gt;ip nat inside source list ACL-NAT2&amp;nbsp;pool&amp;nbsp;POOL-ISP2&amp;nbsp;overload&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P style="font-size: 14.3999996185303px;"&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-family: 'courier new', courier, monospace; font-size: 14px;"&gt;!&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P style="font-size: 14.3999996185303px;"&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-size: 14.3999996185303px;"&gt;The same problem - no Internet access, but if&amp;nbsp;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-size: 14.3999996185303px;"&gt;"&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-family: 'courier new', courier, monospace; font-size: 14px;"&gt;no ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 2.2.2.1&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-size: 14.3999996185303px;"&gt;" &lt;/SPAN&gt;that everything works (but&amp;nbsp;only through one provider)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;DIV&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/DIV&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 17 Apr 2015 08:56:39 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/routing-and-sd-wan/cisco-2851-nat-load-balancing-problem-is-solved/m-p/2651388#M248695</guid>
      <dc:creator>Anton Pestov</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2015-04-17T08:56:39Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>My friend...The idea of doing</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/routing-and-sd-wan/cisco-2851-nat-load-balancing-problem-is-solved/m-p/2651389#M248696</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;My friend...&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;The idea of doing that was not intended to solve the problem, but to allow you to troubleshoot with more granular information...&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I told you to check counters of the interfaces packets, ACLs matches, etc. There are commands to do that:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;show interfaces&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;show ip access-list&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;sho ip nat translations&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;... etc.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;you should already know how to use them and their options.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 17 Apr 2015 17:09:56 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/routing-and-sd-wan/cisco-2851-nat-load-balancing-problem-is-solved/m-p/2651389#M248696</guid>
      <dc:creator>Ricardo Munioz Cabero</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2015-04-17T17:09:56Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>My friend...The idea of doing</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/routing-and-sd-wan/cisco-2851-nat-load-balancing-problem-is-solved/m-p/2651390#M248697</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;My friend...&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;The idea of doing that was not intended to solve the problem, but to allow you to troubleshoot with more granular information...&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I told you to check counters of the interfaces packets, ACLs matches, etc. There are commands to do that:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;show interfaces&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;show ip access-list&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;sho ip nat translations&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;... etc.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;you should already know how to use them and their options.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 17 Apr 2015 17:47:16 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/routing-and-sd-wan/cisco-2851-nat-load-balancing-problem-is-solved/m-p/2651390#M248697</guid>
      <dc:creator>Ricardo Munioz Cabero</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2015-04-17T17:47:16Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Router for translation of</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/routing-and-sd-wan/cisco-2851-nat-load-balancing-problem-is-solved/m-p/2651391#M248698</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Router&amp;nbsp;for translation&amp;nbsp;of addresses only the first record "ip nat inside source list ..." is selected,&amp;nbsp;even if there is the second record is configured. In ios configuration they are sorted in alphabetical order, and always only the first record is used for NAT.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 22 Apr 2015 12:48:06 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/routing-and-sd-wan/cisco-2851-nat-load-balancing-problem-is-solved/m-p/2651391#M248698</guid>
      <dc:creator>Anton Pestov</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2015-04-22T12:48:06Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Hello Anton,</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/routing-and-sd-wan/cisco-2851-nat-load-balancing-problem-is-solved/m-p/2651392#M248699</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hello Anton,&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;ip nat source list only works with one ip nat outside interface. You have to work with route-maps if you want to use NAT over multiple WAN-links.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Try to use the interface statement in the ip nat config. I don't see any reason to work with IP-Pools here if you have only one WAN IP per Interface.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;PRE&gt;
ip nat inside source route-map &lt;SPAN style="font-family:'courier new', courier, monospace; font-size:14px"&gt;RMAP-NAT-ISP1&lt;/SPAN&gt; interface &lt;SPAN style="font-size:14px"&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-family:courier new,courier,monospace"&gt;FastEthernet0/1/0.1101&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt; overload

ip nat inside source route-map &lt;SPAN style="font-family:'courier new', courier, monospace; font-size:14px"&gt;RMAP-NAT-ISP2&lt;/SPAN&gt; interface &lt;SPAN style="font-size:14px"&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-family:courier new,courier,monospace"&gt;FastEthernet0/1/0.1103&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt; overload&lt;/PRE&gt;

&lt;P&gt;The route-maps you posted above look fine.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Are you sure the ACL '&lt;SPAN style="font-size:14px"&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-family:'courier new', courier, monospace"&gt;ACL-NAT1' and 'ACL-NAT2' contains the correct IP Ranges of your clients?&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt; You can also work with only one ACL for both route-maps if the IP-Ranges are the same.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;If you want to use both links equally you have to configure two default routes with the same metric. Otherwise you' ll use only one of your links.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 23 Apr 2015 11:52:01 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/routing-and-sd-wan/cisco-2851-nat-load-balancing-problem-is-solved/m-p/2651392#M248699</guid>
      <dc:creator>LukaszTJB</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2015-04-23T11:52:01Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Hello Lukaszactually I found</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/routing-and-sd-wan/cisco-2851-nat-load-balancing-problem-is-solved/m-p/2651393#M248700</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 23 Apr 2015 20:35:37 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/routing-and-sd-wan/cisco-2851-nat-load-balancing-problem-is-solved/m-p/2651393#M248700</guid>
      <dc:creator>Anton Pestov</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2015-04-23T20:35:37Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Hello Lukasz ACL-NAT1 and ACL</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/routing-and-sd-wan/cisco-2851-nat-load-balancing-problem-is-solved/m-p/2651394#M248701</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hello Lukasz&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;ACL-NAT1 and ACL-NAT2&amp;nbsp;are completely identical.&amp;nbsp;And any of&amp;nbsp;route-map's in general doesn't work (even if interface ip statement in&amp;nbsp;ip nat configured, instead of pools):&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;"&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P style="font-size: 14px;"&gt;&lt;EM&gt;1. I configured identical ACL-NAT's and reconfigured Route-Map's:&lt;/EM&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P style="font-size: 14px;"&gt;&lt;EM&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-family: 'courier new', courier, monospace;"&gt;ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 1.1.1.1&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/EM&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P style="font-size: 14px;"&gt;&lt;EM&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-family: 'courier new', courier, monospace;"&gt;ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 2.2.2.1&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/EM&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P style="font-size: 14px;"&gt;&lt;EM&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-family: 'courier new', courier, monospace;"&gt;!&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/EM&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P style="font-size: 14px;"&gt;&lt;EM&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-family: 'courier new', courier, monospace;"&gt;ip nat inside source route-map RMAP-NAT-ISP1 pool&amp;nbsp;POOL-ISP1 overload&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-family: 'courier new', courier, monospace;"&gt;ip nat inside source route-map RMAP-NAT-ISP2 pool&amp;nbsp;POOL-ISP2&amp;nbsp;overload&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/EM&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P style="font-size: 14px;"&gt;&lt;EM&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-family: 'courier new', courier, monospace;"&gt;!&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/EM&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;DIV style="font-size: 14px;"&gt;&lt;EM&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-family: 'courier new', courier, monospace;"&gt;route-map RMAP-NAT-ISP1 permit 10&lt;BR /&gt;&amp;nbsp;match ip address ACL-NAT1&lt;BR /&gt;&amp;nbsp;match interface FastEthernet0/1/0.1101&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/EM&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;P style="font-size: 14px;"&gt;&lt;EM&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-family: 'courier new', courier, monospace;"&gt;oute-map RMAP-NAT-ISP2 permit 10&lt;BR /&gt;&amp;nbsp;match ip address ACL-NAT2&lt;BR /&gt;&amp;nbsp;match interface FastEthernet0/1/0.1103&lt;BR /&gt;!&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/EM&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P style="font-size: 14px;"&gt;&lt;EM&gt;The same problem - no Internet access,&amp;nbsp;even if "&lt;SPAN style="font-family: 'courier new', courier, monospace;"&gt;no ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 2.2.2.1&lt;/SPAN&gt;" !&lt;/EM&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;"&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Actually I found out the following...&amp;nbsp;&lt;STRONG&gt;balancing of default routes incorrectly&amp;nbsp;works&lt;/STRONG&gt;. All traffic goes through ISP1, even if two default gateways configured! My tests:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I run 'traceroute' with source ip 1.1.1.2&amp;nbsp;(interface from ISP1 subnet) to 8.8.8.8 - OK!&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I run 'traceroute' with&amp;nbsp;source ip 2.2.2.2&amp;nbsp;(interface from ISP2 subnet) to 8.8.8.8 - receive A! A! A! from 1.1.1.1.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;(PBR &amp;amp;&amp;nbsp;ZBF doesn't&amp;nbsp;configured)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 23 Apr 2015 20:50:05 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/routing-and-sd-wan/cisco-2851-nat-load-balancing-problem-is-solved/m-p/2651394#M248701</guid>
      <dc:creator>Anton Pestov</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2015-04-23T20:50:05Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Since both NAT ACLs are</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/routing-and-sd-wan/cisco-2851-nat-load-balancing-problem-is-solved/m-p/2651395#M248702</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Since both NAT ACLs are identical... you could just stop using them and have just the "match interface" statement within each route-map&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Also, I repeat... check the counters of the several "show" commands you have available, don't just wait for a configuration change to suddenly work.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Below some verification commands you could use:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;show route-map&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;show ip interface brief&lt;BR /&gt;!- Be sure the interface pointing to ISP2 is un up/up&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;show ip nat translations&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 23 Apr 2015 21:12:14 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/routing-and-sd-wan/cisco-2851-nat-load-balancing-problem-is-solved/m-p/2651395#M248702</guid>
      <dc:creator>Ricardo Munioz Cabero</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2015-04-23T21:12:14Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>The all problems is solved</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/routing-and-sd-wan/cisco-2851-nat-load-balancing-problem-is-solved/m-p/2651396#M248703</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;The all problems is solved after update IOS from &lt;U&gt;bugged&lt;/U&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;SPAN style="color:#FF0000;"&gt;c2800nm-adventerprisek9-mz.151-4.M.bin&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/STRONG&gt; to lastest&amp;nbsp;&lt;SPAN style="color:#008000;"&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;c2800nm-adventerprisek9-mz.151-4.M10.bin&lt;/STRONG&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/SPAN&gt;!&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Сolleagues, thanks for the help!&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 24 Apr 2015 21:50:06 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/routing-and-sd-wan/cisco-2851-nat-load-balancing-problem-is-solved/m-p/2651396#M248703</guid>
      <dc:creator>Anton Pestov</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2015-04-24T21:50:06Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Great to know that!Still, it</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/routing-and-sd-wan/cisco-2851-nat-load-balancing-problem-is-solved/m-p/2651397#M248704</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Great to know that!&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Still, it's a little weird since 'M' IOS are supposed to be more reliable.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 24 Apr 2015 21:57:23 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/routing-and-sd-wan/cisco-2851-nat-load-balancing-problem-is-solved/m-p/2651397#M248704</guid>
      <dc:creator>Ricardo Munioz Cabero</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2015-04-24T21:57:23Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

