09-14-2018 10:50 AM
Hello, I'm confused about a NAT pool statement in the configs:
ip nat pool mypool 10.2.14.15 10.2.14.15 netmask 255.255.255.248
ip nat inside source list 2 pool mypool overload
What's the point of putting the "netmask" statement when the ip range doesn't move and is just 10.2.14.15 - 10.2.14.15. So it seems that anyone that is NAT'ed against this pool will only get an IP of 10.2.14.15 with different port numbers because of overload.
Solved! Go to Solution.
09-14-2018 11:18 AM
Hello,
actually, you have a good point. It used to be that a WAN IP needed to be at least a /30 address, since you would need a corresponding address on the other side. Nowadays a lot of ISPs dish out /32 addresses. You cannot even configure a pool with a /32 netmask, the IOS will throw an error. So for now, the syntax requires the netmask. Not sure if there are plans in the future to 'equip' IOS with a pool host option.
09-14-2018 11:18 AM
Hello,
actually, you have a good point. It used to be that a WAN IP needed to be at least a /30 address, since you would need a corresponding address on the other side. Nowadays a lot of ISPs dish out /32 addresses. You cannot even configure a pool with a /32 netmask, the IOS will throw an error. So for now, the syntax requires the netmask. Not sure if there are plans in the future to 'equip' IOS with a pool host option.
09-14-2018 11:21 AM
aaah interesting. So it seems this an issue with not being able to configure a /32 so they put in the .248 netmask there. Thank you
09-14-2018 11:23 AM
Indeed, the syntax requires a netmask. /30 is the smallest you can configure. I don't know why they configured a /29 netmask, it might be that their IP address actually really belongs to that subnet...
09-14-2018 11:24 AM
yeah that's a good question. I'm confused about that as well.
Find answers to your questions by entering keywords or phrases in the Search bar above. New here? Use these resources to familiarize yourself with the community: