[c-nsp] basic nat question

[Ryan Goldberg]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Church, Charles [mailto:cchurc05 at harris.com]

> What's the purpose of having those additional addresses bound as
> secondaries?  It's not needed for NAT.

desperate attempt to make things work I guess

> I really did *not* want my first post to cisco-nsp to be this lame,
> but...

aghhhh...

> ip nat inside source static tcp 192.168.1.103 110 x.x.x.161 110 vrf
> ISP2
> extendable
> 
> works just fine
> 
> ip nat inside source static tcp 192.168.1.156 443 x.x.x.163 110 vrf
> ISP2
> extendable
> 
> does not work

Had my head on wrong - wrong vrf.  Although I don't understand at this point why it worked with the primary.

Thanks for the responses...
Ryan