<?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 I don't know.  My guest guess in Network Security</title>
    <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/nat-over-utilized/m-p/2778683#M914865</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;I don't know. &amp;nbsp;My guest guess is the router dropped the packet because it was being processed by the other router (aka was in HSRP standby mode).&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Mon, 25 Jan 2016 01:02:58 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Philip D'Ath</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2016-01-25T01:02:58Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>NAT over utilized?</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/nat-over-utilized/m-p/2778676#M914843</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi All,&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;I just want to know about the results of NAT translations below. Need to know your inputs.&amp;nbsp;Don't know what are the meaning of highlighted below. Thanks in advance!&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Router1:&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Total active translations: 2600 (4 static, 2596 dynamic; 2596 extended)&lt;BR /&gt;Outside interfaces:&lt;BR /&gt; GigabitEthernet0/1/0&lt;BR /&gt;Inside interfaces:&lt;BR /&gt; Port-channel1.99, Port-channel1.100, Port-channel1.101&lt;BR /&gt;Hits: 915070021 Misses: 7640111&lt;BR /&gt;Expired translations: 7576409&lt;BR /&gt;Dynamic mappings:&lt;BR /&gt;-- Inside Source&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;[Id: 2] access-list NAT_ACL interface GigabitEthernet0/2/0 refcount 2513&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;nat-limit statistics:&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt; max entry: max allowed 0, used 0, missed 0&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;In-to-out drops: 176674 Out-to-in drops: 24189&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;Pool stats drop: 0 Mapping stats drop: 0&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;Port block alloc fail: 46628&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;IP alias add fail: 0&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;Limit entry add fail: 0&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Router2:&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Total active translations: 5029 (1 static, 5028 dynamic; 5028 extended)&lt;BR /&gt;Outside interfaces:&lt;BR /&gt; GigabitEthernet0/0/1, GigabitEthernet0/1/0&lt;BR /&gt;Inside interfaces:&lt;BR /&gt; GigabitEthernet0/0/0, Port-channel2.99, Port-channel2.100&lt;BR /&gt; Port-channel2.101&lt;BR /&gt;Hits: 546320465 Misses: 6446100&lt;BR /&gt;Expired translations: 6445134&lt;BR /&gt;Dynamic mappings:&lt;BR /&gt;-- Inside Source&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;[Id: 3] access-list NAT_ACL interface GigabitEthernet0/1/0 refcount 5027&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;nat-limit statistics:&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt; max entry: max allowed 0, used 0, missed 0&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;In-to-out drops: 80066 Out-to-in drops: 59164&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;Pool stats drop: 0 Mapping stats drop: 0&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;Port block alloc fail: 74851&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;IP alias add fail: 0&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;Limit entry add fail: 0&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;-Matt&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 21 Feb 2020 13:42:17 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/nat-over-utilized/m-p/2778676#M914843</guid>
      <dc:creator>martee.o.sacramento</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-02-21T13:42:17Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>How you got any NAT</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/nat-over-utilized/m-p/2778677#M914847</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;How you got any NAT restrictions configured, like:&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;PRE class="prettyprint"&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;ip nat translation max-entries ...&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/PRE&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 22 Jan 2016 22:37:40 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/nat-over-utilized/m-p/2778677#M914847</guid>
      <dc:creator>Philip D'Ath</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2016-01-22T22:37:40Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>No. I dont have configured</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/nat-over-utilized/m-p/2778678#M914850</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;No. I dont have configured max-entries. The only suggested to configured for me is the 1hr expiration of translation "ip nag translation timeout 3600". Is there anything wrong on the outputs of the nat stat?&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sat, 23 Jan 2016 01:23:22 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/nat-over-utilized/m-p/2778678#M914850</guid>
      <dc:creator>martee.o.sacramento</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2016-01-23T01:23:22Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>I'm confused by the "id" in</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/nat-over-utilized/m-p/2778679#M914853</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;I'm confused by the "id" in the output. &amp;nbsp;Is by chance an HSRP NAT configuration?&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sat, 23 Jan 2016 02:14:32 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/nat-over-utilized/m-p/2778679#M914853</guid>
      <dc:creator>Philip D'Ath</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2016-01-23T02:14:32Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Yes. We used HSRP NAT</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/nat-over-utilized/m-p/2778680#M914857</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Yes. We used HSRP NAT configuration. So the Router1 is the primary for the half of the traffic and the Router 2 for the other half.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sat, 23 Jan 2016 02:25:08 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/nat-over-utilized/m-p/2778680#M914857</guid>
      <dc:creator>martee.o.sacramento</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2016-01-23T02:25:08Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>I suspect these numbers my</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/nat-over-utilized/m-p/2778681#M914860</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;I suspect these numbers my reflect that the standby can't apply the NATs that it knows about because it is the standby, and on becoming active it will work.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Not sure.&amp;nbsp; If you aren't observing any issues I don't think I would worry about it.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sat, 23 Jan 2016 06:33:40 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/nat-over-utilized/m-p/2778681#M914860</guid>
      <dc:creator>Philip D'Ath</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2016-01-23T06:33:40Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>BTW. Our setup are just like</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/nat-over-utilized/m-p/2778682#M914863</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;BTW. Our setup&amp;nbsp;are just like this.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;ISP1 &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;&lt;SPAN&gt; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;&lt;/SPAN&gt;ISP2&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;HSRP1 - Active&lt;SPAN&gt; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;&amp;nbsp; HSRP2 - Active&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;HSRP2 - Standby&amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;HSRP1 - Standby&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;NAT1 &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; NAT2&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;I observed that the slowness occurs eventually in ISP2. When I try to re-route some traffic from ISP2 to ISP1. I haven't received an issue occurrence.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Do you know what was the meaning of this part in the results?&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;"In-to-out drops: 80066 Out-to-in drops: 59164"&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;Thanks!&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 25 Jan 2016 00:52:42 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/nat-over-utilized/m-p/2778682#M914863</guid>
      <dc:creator>martee.o.sacramento</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2016-01-25T00:52:42Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>I don't know.  My guest guess</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/nat-over-utilized/m-p/2778683#M914865</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;I don't know. &amp;nbsp;My guest guess is the router dropped the packet because it was being processed by the other router (aka was in HSRP standby mode).&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 25 Jan 2016 01:02:58 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/nat-over-utilized/m-p/2778683#M914865</guid>
      <dc:creator>Philip D'Ath</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2016-01-25T01:02:58Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Is NAT can cause of latency</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/nat-over-utilized/m-p/2778684#M914867</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Is NAT can cause of latency/disconnections?&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 26 Jan 2016 05:31:34 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/nat-over-utilized/m-p/2778684#M914867</guid>
      <dc:creator>martee.o.sacramento</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2016-01-26T05:31:34Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Latency, not usually.</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/nat-over-utilized/m-p/2778685#M914869</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Latency, not usually. &amp;nbsp;Disconnections, yes if it is having a problem.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 26 Jan 2016 05:38:58 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/nat-over-utilized/m-p/2778685#M914869</guid>
      <dc:creator>Philip D'Ath</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2016-01-26T05:38:58Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Ok. Maybe I should take a</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/nat-over-utilized/m-p/2778686#M914871</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Ok. Maybe I should take a look deep to the NAT issues. Thanks Bro! Have a nice a day.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 29 Jan 2016 05:28:45 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/nat-over-utilized/m-p/2778686#M914871</guid>
      <dc:creator>martee.o.sacramento</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2016-01-29T05:28:45Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

