cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
cancel
234
Views
0
Helpful
2
Replies
Carlos A. Silva
Participant

[cgnat] 2 inside-vrfs NAT to same outside pool

Hi, All:

 

With version 5.1.3 (or in other version), is it possible to map 2 different inside-vrfs so that they are NAT'd to the same outside pool in default-vrf?

 

Something like:

 

service cgn cgn1

 service-location preferred-active 0/3/CPU0

 service-type nat44 NAT44

  portlimit 2048

  inside-vrf nat1

   map address-pool 172.16.120.0/22

  inside-vrf nat2

   map address-pool 172.16.120.0/22

 

As shown, i have 2 inside VRFs and the 172.16.120.0/22 is in the global table.

 

Thanks in advance!

c.

2 REPLIES 2
ranramal
Cisco Employee

Hi Carlos

                If it is same mapped public address pool, it is going to be challenge to configure o2i without getting o2i drops.

 

                Otherwise following configuration is allowed:

 

RP/0/RP0/CPU0:Router(config-cgn-invrf)#show                           

Fri Jun 15 16:54:52.430 PDT

service cgn demo

service-type nat44 nat44-1

  inside-vrf Inside-1

   map address-pool 151.0.0.0/24

  !

  inside-vrf Inside-2

   map address-pool 151.0.1.0/24

  !

RP/0/RP0/CPU0:Router(config-cgn-invrf)#

 

                From 5.2.0 onwards, using ABF based redundancy, same public address pool can be configured across two different cards.

 

Thanks

Ranga

Thanks for your reply, Ranga.

 

See, the thing is that (using your example) pool for vrf Inside-1 is underutilized so, but for design reasons we need vrf Inside-2 and would like to avoid using more ip space so that Inside-2 has its own pool. 

From what you say, I have 2 choices:

 

1) Splitting Inside-1 pool

2) Maybe route-leaking