<?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 Re: VPN issue - overlap subnet in Network Security</title>
    <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/vpn-issue-overlap-subnet/m-p/849337#M1064090</link>
    <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;J&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Glad to have helped. Thanks for getting back and appreciate the rating. &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Jon&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Mon, 17 Sep 2007 13:36:20 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Jon Marshall</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2007-09-17T13:36:20Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>VPN issue - overlap subnet</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/vpn-issue-overlap-subnet/m-p/849330#M1064078</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I only have a basic VPN understanding and I'm in a bit of a mess...&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;The problem that I'm facing is that I have a client that has the same private ip subnet as myself. I understand that I need to perform NAT but the issue is that I want to perform NAT for one subnet for one client only, leaving all else the same. &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Looking at the config (I have a 3640), I would think I need something like this:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;interface Ethernet0/1&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt; ip address x.x.x.x 255.255.255.0&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt; ip nat inside&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt; crypto map wwmap&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;route-map test permit 10&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;match ip address 110&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;access-list 110 permit ip 172.16.0.0 0.0.255.255 172.28.0.0 0.0.255.255&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;ip nat inside source static 172.16.0.50 172.28.0.50 route-map test&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Where 172.16.0.0/16 is the source subnet and 172.28.0.0/16 is what I want to NAT to. Also, I only have one host (172.16.0.50) that they need to access.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;They will perform similar their end so I just see their 172.16.0.0/16 as its NATted address.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;How to I ensure that no other NATting takes place? I assume as my config stands all else would fail?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Any help much appreciated. All articles I find assume that you want NAT to take place for all out going traffic but this is not the case.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thank you,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;J&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 21 Feb 2020 09:40:57 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/vpn-issue-overlap-subnet/m-p/849330#M1064078</guid>
      <dc:creator>jigsaw2026</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-02-21T09:40:57Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: VPN issue - overlap subnet</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/vpn-issue-overlap-subnet/m-p/849331#M1064080</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hi&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Can you clarify. &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Your source IP addresses: 172.16.0.0/16&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;You want to NAT these addresses to 172.28.0.0/16. &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;What addresses are the remote site presenting their 172.16.0.0/16 addresses as ? &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Jon&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 13 Sep 2007 10:21:47 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/vpn-issue-overlap-subnet/m-p/849331#M1064080</guid>
      <dc:creator>Jon Marshall</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2007-09-13T10:21:47Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: VPN issue - overlap subnet</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/vpn-issue-overlap-subnet/m-p/849332#M1064082</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hi Jon,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks for responding.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;They will be presenting as 172.30.0.0/16.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I didn't include it as I assumed from my end I would just treat them as such...&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thank you,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;J&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 13 Sep 2007 10:51:45 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/vpn-issue-overlap-subnet/m-p/849332#M1064082</guid>
      <dc:creator>jigsaw2026</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2007-09-13T10:51:45Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: VPN issue - overlap subnet</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/vpn-issue-overlap-subnet/m-p/849333#M1064084</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hi &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;1) Your clients accessing the remote end&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;access-list 110 permit ip 172.16.0.0 0.0.255.255 172.30.0.0 0.0.255.255&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;ip nat pool NATPOOL 172.28.0.0 172.28.255.254 netmask 255.255.0.0&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;ip nat inside source list 110 pool NATPOOL&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Your crypto access-list should look something like this &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;access-list vpntraffic permit ip 172.28.0.0 0.0.255.255 172.30.0.0 0.0.255.255&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;2) The individual server&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;access-list 111 permit ip host 172.16.0.50 host 172.28.0.50 &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;ip nat inside source static 172.16.0.50 172.28.0.50 route_map nat_ip&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;route-map nat_ip permit 10&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt; match ip address 111&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;NOTE: This will need testing. 172.16.0.50 is included in the 172.16.0.0 range so it might not get natted to the IP address you want.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;HTH&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Jon&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 13 Sep 2007 11:11:42 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/vpn-issue-overlap-subnet/m-p/849333#M1064084</guid>
      <dc:creator>Jon Marshall</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2007-09-13T11:11:42Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: VPN issue - overlap subnet</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/vpn-issue-overlap-subnet/m-p/849334#M1064086</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hi,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thank you so much for your help, it's much appreciated!&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Can I please pick your brain some more? I have had more clarification now - their 172.16.0.0/16 subnet will not be used to connect to us (it's more a routing issue for them), so no NAT is being performed their end.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;We basically have 2 servers on that subnet that their users on subnet 192.168.1.0/24 will be contacting, and that is all.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;So, I think that your point 1 is probably not required here?...this is my revised configuration after studying point 2 -&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;#to allow their subnet to access the NATted subnet&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;access-list 111 permit 192.168.1.0 0.0.0.255 172.28.0.0 0.0.255.255&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;#staic NAT for each server&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;ip nat inside source static 172.16.0.50 172.28.0.50 route_map nat_ip&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;ip nat inside source static 172.16.0.100 172.28.0.100 route_map nat_ip&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;#route map&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;route-map nat_ip permit 10&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;match ip address 111&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Do I need a ip nat inside on my inside interface? And if so, will this have an affect on the rest of the traffic that's not being NATted?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Also, will this work now for calls from 192.168.0.0/24 coming into our servers?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Many thanks, I'm sorry if this is really obvious!!!&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;J&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 14 Sep 2007 08:08:47 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/vpn-issue-overlap-subnet/m-p/849334#M1064086</guid>
      <dc:creator>jigsaw2026</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2007-09-14T08:08:47Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: VPN issue - overlap subnet</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/vpn-issue-overlap-subnet/m-p/849335#M1064088</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hi J&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Apologies for delay in getting back. &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;You will need a "ip nat inside" on your inside interface and an "ip nat outside" on your outside interface.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;No it will only effect the traffic you have included in your access-list.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Yes it should work for connections initiated from 192.168.0.0/24 clients. &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;No need to apologize, NAT is not one of the most obvious things to be honest.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Also, as with any changes you need to implement these out of hours if possible. What should work in theory often has a way of not in practice &lt;span class="lia-unicode-emoji" title=":slightly_smiling_face:"&gt;🙂&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Jon&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 14 Sep 2007 15:27:17 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/vpn-issue-overlap-subnet/m-p/849335#M1064088</guid>
      <dc:creator>Jon Marshall</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2007-09-14T15:27:17Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: VPN issue - overlap subnet</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/vpn-issue-overlap-subnet/m-p/849336#M1064089</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hi Jon,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Well... I've implemented the changes (out of hours!) and it all works!&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thank you so much for all of your help - I would have been stuck without you so it's very much appreciated.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;J&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 17 Sep 2007 13:34:39 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/vpn-issue-overlap-subnet/m-p/849336#M1064089</guid>
      <dc:creator>jigsaw2026</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2007-09-17T13:34:39Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: VPN issue - overlap subnet</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/vpn-issue-overlap-subnet/m-p/849337#M1064090</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;J&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Glad to have helped. Thanks for getting back and appreciate the rating. &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Jon&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 17 Sep 2007 13:36:20 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/vpn-issue-overlap-subnet/m-p/849337#M1064090</guid>
      <dc:creator>Jon Marshall</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2007-09-17T13:36:20Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

