<?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: NAT config in Network Security</title>
    <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/nat-config/m-p/1329552#M764167</link>
    <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;You are awesome.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Thu, 29 Oct 2009 17:35:41 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>oneirishpollack</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2009-10-29T17:35:41Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>NAT config</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/nat-config/m-p/1329550#M764160</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;My company has a /24 global address. The NAT/PAT was setup to translate approx. 60 addresses per subnet using NAT, and then â&amp;#128;&amp;#156;failoverâ&amp;#128;&amp;#157; (is that the right terminology) to PAT. So we have something like what I have below:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Engineering (subnet 10.7.7.0) ---ï&amp;#131;&amp;nbsp; (Global Pool 7) NAT 189.23.24.60 - 189.23.24.150, PAT 189.23.24.151&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Marketing (subnet 10.7.8.0) -ï&amp;#131;&amp;nbsp; (Global Pool &lt;span class="lia-unicode-emoji" title=":smiling_face_with_sunglasses:"&gt;😎&lt;/span&gt; NAT 189.23.24.152 - 189.23.24.225, PAT 189.23.24.226&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Can you tell me how common of a configuration the one-to-one mapping with a PAT â&amp;#128;&amp;#156;failoverâ&amp;#128;&amp;#157; or catchall is?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;How about from the perspective of resource utilization on the ASA 5510. Is it more work for it to do PAT vs. NAT?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;When the ASA looks at the global pool, does it always pull from the NAT before it used the PAT address? That would seem logical, but I wasn't sure if you added the PAT into the pool first, before the range, if it would disregard the range all together. &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 11 Mar 2019 16:33:57 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/nat-config/m-p/1329550#M764160</guid>
      <dc:creator>oneirishpollack</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2019-03-11T16:33:57Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: NAT config</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/nat-config/m-p/1329551#M764163</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;I&gt;Can you tell me how common of a configuration the one-to-one mapping with a PAT â&amp;#128;&amp;#156;failoverâ&amp;#128;&amp;#157; or catchall is?&lt;/I&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;It's not common, but most firms don't have a /24 so just a PAT is more common.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;I&gt;How about from the perspective of resource utilization on the ASA 5510. Is it more work for it to do PAT vs. NAT?&lt;/I&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Pretty much the same.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;I&gt;When the ASA looks at the global pool, does it always pull from the NAT before it used the PAT address? &lt;/I&gt; &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Yes, it grabs a full NAT until they are all gone, then it uses the PAT address.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hope it helps.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 29 Oct 2009 14:50:26 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/nat-config/m-p/1329551#M764163</guid>
      <dc:creator>Collin Clark</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2009-10-29T14:50:26Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: NAT config</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/nat-config/m-p/1329552#M764167</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;You are awesome.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 29 Oct 2009 17:35:41 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/nat-config/m-p/1329552#M764167</guid>
      <dc:creator>oneirishpollack</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2009-10-29T17:35:41Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

