Cisco NAT for exchange 2010

All, I have a cisco 1800 series router that I need to have an exchange server behind.  It's running IOS without the firewall enabled, rather, access is more or less turned off or on on a one by one basis.

I have an exchange server with the proper MX and A records at the ISP level.  The current configuration worked previously by doing a NAT translation inside and out like this:

ip nat pool exchange 192.168.1.7 192.168.1.7 netmask 255.255.255.255
ip nat inside source static network 192.168.1.7 66.66.66.123 /32
ip nat outside source static network 66.66.66.123 192.168.1.7 /32

This configuration worked with the Cisco 831 for over a year.  We did get an occasional IP conflict error when we had an outage and came back up, but I was always able to program around it by changing the NAT to another internal IP, then bringing up the server, then changing it back.  I realize this was a redneck solution, but it did work and I figured I'd figure out the issue later.

Later is now.

When we replaced the 831with a cisco 1800, it reports an IP conflict. at both the router, and server.  The NAT translation is using the address and the exchange server shows as 'no internet access' as you would expect from an IP conflict.  It is not resolveable by the workaround I previously mentioned.  The newer router is far less tolerant, it seems, of this kind of NAT/IP conflict.

I have no idea how it worked before given what I now know.  However, I'm not at all sure how to fix this going forward.  what is the correct way to make this work, using the IP information above?  I need to be sure that OWA access is available inside and outside the internal network, and that direct access through outlook is available internally.  Help!
John WAsked:
Who is Participating?
 
Ernie BeekConnect With a Mentor ExpertCommented:
After re-reading, also remove 'network'. So then you get:
ip nat inside source static 192.168.1.7 66.66.66.123

One other question, is the public ip the address of the outside interface or an extra one?
0
 
SuperTacoCommented:
You don't need the nat pool for a static NAT.  Just the statement below it
0
 
Ernie BeekExpertCommented:
The only statement you need is: ip nat inside source static network 192.168.1.7 66.66.66.123 /32

The other two just mess things up ;)
0
Has Powershell sent you back into the Stone Age?

If managing Active Directory using Windows Powershell® is making you feel like you stepped back in time, you are not alone.  For nearly 20 years, AD admins around the world have used one tool for day-to-day AD management: Hyena. Discover why.

 
John WAuthor Commented:
Sorry for the belated response.

The IP is not the same as the external interface, rather, an extra one as part of several we have.  DNS, MX records, etc are assigned to it to create mail.company.com / webmail.company.com and so forth.
0
 
Ernie BeekExpertCommented:
Ok, then it should be like this.

Remove the three lines:
ip nat pool exchange 192.168.1.7 192.168.1.7 netmask 255.255.255.255
ip nat inside source static network 192.168.1.7 66.66.66.123 /32
ip nat outside source static network 66.66.66.123 192.168.1.7 /32


And replace them with:
p nat inside source static 192.168.1.7 66.66.66.123

Then let's see where that leads you.
0
 
John WAuthor Commented:
Thanks so much!
0
 
Ernie BeekExpertCommented:
You're welcome :)
Thx for the points.
0
Question has a verified solution.

Are you are experiencing a similar issue? Get a personalized answer when you ask a related question.

Have a better answer? Share it in a comment.

All Courses

From novice to tech pro — start learning today.