cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
cancel
21271
Views
0
Helpful
16
Replies

what does this mean (nat-no-xlate-to-pat-pool) Connection to PAT address without pre-existing xlate???

g_parmar83
Level 1
Level 1

hi to all

i try to ping  to outside interface of VPN concentrator through ASA 5520 via a 3750 switch in between them,  but unable to do so.

i did the packet trace through the command line

and getting following

packet-tracer input outside icmp 0 0 8  3.3.3.3

Phase: 1

Type: ROUTE-LOOKUP

Subtype: input

Result: ALLOW

Config:

Additional Information:

in   3.3.3.1  255.255.255.248 outside

Result:

input-interface: outside

input-status: up

input-line-status: up

output-interface: outside

output-status: up

output-line-status: up

Action: drop

Drop-reason: (nat-no-xlate-to-pat-pool) Connection to PAT address without pre-existing xlate

could some one please expalin me, what exactly is going on here??????????

thanks

in advance.

16 Replies 16

Hi,

Seems to me that the above things you wrote are correct.

- Jouni

hehe
Level 1
Level 1
CSCun95075 - ASA drops packet due to nat-no-xlate-to-pat-pool after removing NAT rule Symptom: Once a twice NAT rule with a service translation is added, other traffic on the interface may also be dropped with a reason of nat-no-xlate-to-pat-pool. This is expected behavior and more details can be found here: http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/security/asa/asa91/configuration/firewall/asa_91_firewall_config/access_fwaaa.html#wp1331733 However, if the NAT rule references an object-group and that object-group is changed while the NAT rule is still configured, traffic may still be dropped even after removing the NAT rule. Conditions: All of the following conditions must be matched to see this issue: 1) The ASA is configured with a twice NAT rule that uses a service translation 2) The object-group referenced in the NAT rule is edited (i.e. a new network-object is added to it) while the NAT rule is still configured 3) The NAT rule is removed from the configuration Workaround: Reloading the ASA after the offending NAT rule is removed will resolve the issue. Bug Fixed in release : 9.1.5(1) or 9.1.2(100) Regards Karthik
Review Cisco Networking for a $25 gift card