[nsp] RE: Route maps versus access-lists in NAT

[Pete Templin]

Ah, a question that I can answer.  NAT can use standard access lists or route maps, but can't directly use extended access lists.  So if you want to use extended access lists to classify whether traffic should be NATted, you'll need to embed the ACL in a route map.

Pete Templin
IP Network Engineer
TexLink Communications
(210) 892-4183
pete.templin at texlink.com

-----Original Message-----
From: Jarrod Baumann [mailto:jarrod at advmed.com]
Sent: Thursday, April 24, 2003 3:07 PM
To: Ejay Hire
Cc: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [nsp] RE: Route maps versus access-lists in NAT

Maybe people are planning ahead and implementing the correct solution
the first time so if in fact they need to manipulate it later on by
using the multiple features of route-maps.. they can.

J
On Thu, 24 Apr 2003, Ejay Hire wrote:

:
:
:Can someone explain why some use Route maps instead of access-lists for NAT statements?  I am specifically referring to simple match access-lists with no set statements.  This seems to be an additional level of uneeded complexity.
:Thanks,
:Ejay
:
:_______________________________________________
:cisco-nsp mailing list  cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
:http://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
:archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
:

_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list  cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
http://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/