[Okta Webinar] Learn how to a build a cloud-first strategyRegister Now

x
  • Status: Solved
  • Priority: Medium
  • Security: Public
  • Views: 463
  • Last Modified:

Cisco 2621 Port Address Translation Vs. Network Address Translation

We want to successfully NAT specific ports to a internal server ip. For example our exchange 2003 server. Only port 80 53 21 should be Natted through our router to the server.
When we NAT those individual ports through our router it doesnt work. (Cant browse the internet, or send outside emails.)
ip nat inside source static tcp 10.9.200.2 53 xx.xxx.xxx.xxx 53 extendable
ip nat inside source static udp 10.9.200.2 53 xx.xxx.xxx.xxx 53 extendable
ip nat inside source static tcp 10.9.200.2 80 xx.xxx.xxx.xxx 80 extendable
ip nat inside source static tcp 10.9.200.2 21 xx.xxx.xxx.xxx 21 extendable


When we NAT everything to the server everything works fine. Even when we setup the windows 2003 built in firewall and block everything except the desired ports.

ip nat inside source static 10.9.200.2 xx.xxx.xxx.xxx extendable

This happens on 2003 2000 and XP Pro machines all the same.  
So why would the router not allow the NATting of indivuidual ports?
0
Mohonk
Asked:
Mohonk
1 Solution
 
JFrederick29Commented:
Are you permitting these ports via your access-list?
0
 
MohonkAuthor Commented:
Your the man thanks!
0

Featured Post

New feature and membership benefit!

New feature! Upgrade and increase expert visibility of your issues with Priority Questions.

Tackle projects and never again get stuck behind a technical roadblock.
Join Now