<?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: PIX: NAT in Site to Site VPN in Network Security</title>
    <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/pix-nat-in-site-to-site-vpn/m-p/1171393#M877843</link>
    <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Chas&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Yes it is possible although if other companies are accessing the same server in it's private IP address that is going to be problematic.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Assuming it isn't lets say - &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;ptivate host at your end = 192.168.5.10&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;public IP you present it as to remote site - 212.12.12.1&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Your crypto map access-list at your end would be &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;access-list vpntraffic permit ip host 212.12.12.1 17216.5.0 255.255.255.0&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;ie. the key thing is in your crypto map you need to reference the Natted IP address.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Jon&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;remote site subnet = 172.16.5.0/24&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Fri, 09 Jan 2009 22:27:12 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Jon Marshall</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2009-01-09T22:27:12Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>PIX: NAT in Site to Site VPN</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/pix-nat-in-site-to-site-vpn/m-p/1171392#M877842</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hopefully someone can confirm this is possible. &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I have a PIX 525 running v7.2 and it terminates several Site-To-Site VPNs with other organisations who then use services hosted on a DMZ. That all works fine. &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I'm connecting up another organisation who cannot route to private address space down a VPN at their end. That causes a problem, because the address they need to contact down the VPN is a private one.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;So is it possible to do a NAT to one of our Internet addresses on the outside of the PIX, but still have them access it over the VPN?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;There doesn't seem to be an equivalent config on the Cisco support examples and I've checked the Wiki, but couldn't find anything that matches this scenario. &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Chas&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 11 Mar 2019 14:35:09 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/pix-nat-in-site-to-site-vpn/m-p/1171392#M877842</guid>
      <dc:creator>4c.gregory</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2019-03-11T14:35:09Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: PIX: NAT in Site to Site VPN</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/pix-nat-in-site-to-site-vpn/m-p/1171393#M877843</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Chas&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Yes it is possible although if other companies are accessing the same server in it's private IP address that is going to be problematic.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Assuming it isn't lets say - &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;ptivate host at your end = 192.168.5.10&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;public IP you present it as to remote site - 212.12.12.1&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Your crypto map access-list at your end would be &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;access-list vpntraffic permit ip host 212.12.12.1 17216.5.0 255.255.255.0&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;ie. the key thing is in your crypto map you need to reference the Natted IP address.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Jon&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;remote site subnet = 172.16.5.0/24&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 09 Jan 2009 22:27:12 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/pix-nat-in-site-to-site-vpn/m-p/1171393#M877843</guid>
      <dc:creator>Jon Marshall</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2009-01-09T22:27:12Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: PIX: NAT in Site to Site VPN</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/pix-nat-in-site-to-site-vpn/m-p/1171394#M877844</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Jon&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks for the response. &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Unfortunate other companies do access the private address down the Site-2-Site VPNs. What's the problematic bit?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;So the NAT would be as normal? We already have this in place as one particular organisation accesses it using a static NAT as the protocol is SSL'ed already - something like:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;static (inside,outside) 212.12.12.1 192.168.5.10 netmask 255.255.255.255 &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Regards&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Chas&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sat, 10 Jan 2009 04:36:47 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/pix-nat-in-site-to-site-vpn/m-p/1171394#M877844</guid>
      <dc:creator>4c.gregory</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2009-01-10T04:36:47Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: PIX: NAT in Site to Site VPN</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/pix-nat-in-site-to-site-vpn/m-p/1171395#M877845</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Chas use this:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;access-list ext NAT permit ip host 192.168.5.10 172.16.5.0 255.255.255.0&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;static (inside,outside) 212.12.12.1 access-list NAT&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Your Crypto access-list should be:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;access-list ext vpntraffic permit host 212.12.12.1 172.16.5.0 255.255.255.0&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Also, note that you need not put the traffic from 192.168.5.10 server to 172.16.5.0 n/w in NONAT access-list that you may have for VPN traffic that is non-nated.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sun, 18 Jan 2009 02:27:23 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/pix-nat-in-site-to-site-vpn/m-p/1171395#M877845</guid>
      <dc:creator>rkalia1</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2009-01-18T02:27:23Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

