<?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 issue in Network Security</title>
    <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/nat-issue/m-p/1192973#M877710</link>
    <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Will Policy NAT retain the original source port?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:14:08 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>rsullivan1</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2009-01-14T13:14:08Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>NAT issue</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/nat-issue/m-p/1192972#M877709</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;I have an application that requires that the host clients retain their source port. The source ports range from TCP/10000-10040 and the destination server listens on TCP/12000. I need to NAT these hosts to a single IP address as well. Can I use a Dynamic policy NAT Rule for each port to retain the source port during NAT(PAT)? This is on an PIX/ASA.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 11 Mar 2019 14:36:39 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/nat-issue/m-p/1192972#M877709</guid>
      <dc:creator>rsullivan1</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2019-03-11T14:36:39Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: NAT issue</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/nat-issue/m-p/1192973#M877710</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Will Policy NAT retain the original source port?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:14:08 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/nat-issue/m-p/1192973#M877710</guid>
      <dc:creator>rsullivan1</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2009-01-14T13:14:08Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: NAT issue</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/nat-issue/m-p/1192974#M877711</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hi Robert,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt; i think yes its all depend on how you define it.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;HTH&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;DAK&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 14 Jan 2009 14:33:19 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/nat-issue/m-p/1192974#M877711</guid>
      <dc:creator>Davy Ad</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2009-01-14T14:33:19Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: NAT issue</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/nat-issue/m-p/1192975#M877712</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;If I define a DynNAT Policy for each source port starting with 10000 will it then use port 10000 when it NATs? This is my best thought process as the clients are DHCP hosts and it would difficult to manage them with static IPs and Static NAT entries. &lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 14 Jan 2009 15:41:03 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/nat-issue/m-p/1192975#M877712</guid>
      <dc:creator>rsullivan1</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2009-01-14T15:41:03Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

