Thanks Peter. I found that by simply removing the VRF from the interfaces I wished to do nat on (even though they were in the same VRF) allowed my nat to overload. Is this expected behavior?
All is working now. Thanks all for your help. db On Nov 26, 2013, at 6:18 PM, Pete Lumbis <[email protected]> wrote: > The question is will basic NAT overload work without VRFs on SX code? Yes, > given the endless list of 6k NAT limitations. > > > On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 10:37 AM, Dan Benson <[email protected]> wrote: > All, > > >From reading it seems the 7600 does not support NAT in vrf (without an FWSM) > >but I thought I would ask the question. I have two interfaces in the same > >VRF (inside and outside) and I am able to static translate inbound but I am > >unable to overload with TCP and udp packets. ICMP packets traverse the > >interfaces but nothing else. Will this work if I don’t have the VRF? > > I am running s72033-adventerprisek9-mz.151-1.SY.bin. > > Thanks in advance for your insight. > > db > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp > archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ > _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
