cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
cancel
550
Views
0
Helpful
3
Replies

NAT with overlapping IP Space and IOS firewall/IPSEC

Phil Williamson
Level 1
Level 1

My perimeter router is also the CBAC and IPSEC gateway. I need to configure some static NAT for overlapping IP space and pass it through a VPN tunnel. Is this possible on just the one router? I've looked at the order of NAT, IPSEC, ACLs etc and it seems possible. Any commennts before I forge ahead?

3 Replies 3

gfullage
Cisco Employee
Cisco Employee

NAT happens before encryption in a router, so add your static NAT in just as normal. Then for your crypto ACL, specify the source as the already NAT'd address going to the remote subnet, and it will be NAT'd and encrypted fine.

On the way back decryption happens before NAT, so the packet will be decrypted then NAT'd back to its orignal address, nothing special needs to be done here.

FYI, the same principle happens in a PIX, so if you ever want to do that (nat and encryption), then just do the same thing as above.

Hope that helps.

Glenn - Yes, that was what I needed. I'm now seeing this crypto debug message that I cannot figure out. It's keeping NAT phase 1 from completing it appears. I'm trying to create a tunnel to a Netscreen firewall if that helps.

*Mar 1 00:17:51: %CRYPTO-6-IKMP_NOT_ENCRYPTED: IKE packet from 208.61.250.87

was not encrypted and it should've been.

The suggestion is to contact the remote peer and ??? What do I tell the Netscreen guy?

Thanks

This message means the router has recieved an unencrypted packet that matches one of it's crypto ACL's, therefore it knows that it should have been encrypted, and it drops it.

So, the Netscreen is sending you unencrypted packets, so it's not been set up correctly. I don't know specifically what parameters to check on a Netscreen, but there'll be something in it that says "encrypt traffic from address to address". In the Cisco router this is your crypto ACL, Netscreen will have something similar I presume. You have to make sure the source and destination addresses/subnets defined here are the exact opposite of each other on both sides, otherwise you get this error.