12-17-2014 02:22 PM - edited 03-07-2019 09:56 PM
I'm practicing network monitoring and syslog. I have an all-in-one cable modem/router (leftover from before I bought my Cisco gear) that will send syslog, but only to a host on its own subnet. Is there a way I can make the router's internet facing interface forward received syslog messages to my syslog server?
Topology:
[Cable Modem]--layer3--[2821ISR]--internal layer3--[Etherswitch Module]--VLAN10--[Syslog server]
Solved! Go to Solution.
12-17-2014 02:42 PM
Jason
You could try setting up a NAT rule on the 2821 so that traffic sent to the 2821 router IP that connects to the cable modem is translated to an internal IP eg.
int <x>-- connects to cable modem
ip nat outside
int <y> <-- connects to switch
ip nat inside
ip nat inside source static udp <internal IP address> 514 interface <x> 514
Can't guarantee it will work as I have never done syslog with NAT but can't see why it wouldn't.
Jon
12-17-2014 02:42 PM
Jason
You could try setting up a NAT rule on the 2821 so that traffic sent to the 2821 router IP that connects to the cable modem is translated to an internal IP eg.
int <x>-- connects to cable modem
ip nat outside
int <y> <-- connects to switch
ip nat inside
ip nat inside source static udp <internal IP address> 514 interface <x> 514
Can't guarantee it will work as I have never done syslog with NAT but can't see why it wouldn't.
Jon
12-18-2014 07:36 AM
In this example, is <internal IP address> the IP of the syslog server or the router IP that the cable modem sends syslog to? And is interface <x> the interface the syslog traffic comes in on, or the interface it should be sent to to be sent to the syslog server?
12-18-2014 10:10 AM
Apologies I should have been clearer.
The internal IP address is the syslog server.
Interface <x> connects to the cable modem so that is the interface the syslog traffic will arrive at the router on from the cable modem.
Interface <y> is the one that is used by the router to send the traffic to the syslog.
Jon
12-21-2014 11:55 AM
Thanks, that worked beautifully.
Although it took me a few goofed tries to realize the nat translation command is a global command. I should have known that, though. I set up the original translation...just a "brain fart" I guess.
12-21-2014 12:14 PM
Yes, looking at the configuration I posted I can see why you'd think that, sorry :-)
Glad to hear it's working.
Jon
Discover and save your favorite ideas. Come back to expert answers, step-by-step guides, recent topics, and more.
New here? Get started with these tips. How to use Community New member guide