Can the destination address be changed by using outside NAT?
Routing protocols cannot be changed.
Here is my network:
-
Can you confirm where you are performing NAT and why? If you are tracking CRI_1 with icmp echo for example then just use a route-map to set your next-hop ip address based on the behaviour of the track object.– MattECommented Jan 19, 2014 at 8:15
-
1Sorry MattE. I am actually tracking CRI_1 from Host_R1 (not from GW_R1) and I can do changes only on Host_R1. GW_R1 and other routers are out of my control. Hence I thought NAT is the only solution.– Mahesh MCommented Jan 19, 2014 at 9:11
-
If I change next-hop to 20.0.0.1 and if the packet coming from Host has destination address of 10.0.0.1, packet will get dropped. What I want is that when IPSLA triggers, the destination IP in the packet coming from Host should change automatically.– Mahesh MCommented Jan 19, 2014 at 10:01
-
I assume this is related to some form of disaster recovery mechanism. If so, is there only one host at each location, or are we talking about many hosts?– Mike PenningtonCommented Jan 19, 2014 at 14:12
-
Yes. This is for the redundancy mechanism. There is only one host at each location. Also, In the Host, only one IP (of destination server) can be given.– Mahesh MCommented Jan 20, 2014 at 20:21
|
Show 1 more comment
1 Answer
I'm not sure this will work. I don't have a lab to try it, but it works great on paper ;)
In this example, host will connect to 40.0.0.1, which is a natted address.
access-list 10 permit 10.0.0.1
access-list 20 permit 20.0.0.1
route-map CRI-1 permit 10
match ip address 10
route-map CRI-2 permit 10
match ip address 20
ip nat outside source static 10.0.0.1 40.0.0.1 route-map CRI-1
ip nat outside source static 20.0.0.1 40.0.0.1 route-map CRI-2
answered Jan 20, 2014 at 23:39
-
How does this failover to
20.0.0.1once the connection to10.0.0.1fails? Commented Mar 23, 2014 at 13:24 -
This part doesn't. As I recall, the issue was how to do NAT. Using IPSLA to trigger routing was already understood. Feel free to add that part if you like. Commented Mar 23, 2014 at 16:08
-
No need, I was just reading the "Requirement" portion of the network diagram, which doesn't have much to do with the OP. Commented Mar 23, 2014 at 21:22