- last edited on by
Translator
Hi, Rules:
------------
1- All routers will be hostnamed, their console/enable security configured (let me know the passwords of course)
2- Internet Router and ALL end-devices will acquire IP addresses via DHCP
3- PC0, PC1, PC2 and PC3 will use dynamic addressing scheme when reaching the Internet (NAT/PAT both OK)
4- Internet Network will be connected through static routing (No Dynamic Routing will be accepted)
5- VPN Tunnel is to be established between Router1 and Router3 for
10.10.10.10.0/24 and 30.30.30.0/24
networks.
In my project, I began by manually assigning IP addresses to all devices except the switches. Next, I configured EIGRP routing and tested the connectivity by pinging PC2 from PC0, which was successful. Since Router1 and Router3 are located at the edge of the internet, I implemented NAT (Network Address Translation) on both routers to convert private IP addresses to public ones.
However, I encountered an issue where I could ping Router3 from PC0 but not PC2. Upon simulating the packet flow, I observed that the returned packet was being lost at Router1. Further investigation revealed that in the NAT translations on Router1, the destination address appeared as the local IP address
30.30.30.4
However, when the packet returned from PC2, Router3 translated the destination address to a public IP, causing Router1 to be unable to match the translation and resolve the given IP address to PC0. As a result, Router1 attempted to broadcast the packet in an attempt to find the IP address.
Based on the situation described, deleting the NAT configuration from Router3 seems to be a potential solution. By removing the NAT configuration on Router3, the returned packet's destination address will remain as the local IP address, allowing Router1 to successfully match the translation and resolve the IP address to PC0.
Any other solutions ? (Nat eigrp both working well, i don't think that i did something wrong.)
