Welcome to ISAserver.org

Changing From Nat to Route in ISA 2006

Users viewing this topic: none

Logged in as: Guest

Printable Version

All Forums >> [ISA 2006 Firewall] >> Network Infrastructure >> Changing From Nat to Route in ISA 2006

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Changing From Nat to Route in ISA 2006 - 31.Oct.2007 6:08:08 PM

SPI

Posts: 8
Joined: 20.Apr.2006
Status: offline

I am in the process of upgrading my Sonicwall 4060 and I want to have the sonicwall do NAT and have ISA do routing. Currently, ISA does NAT and the sonicwall does not. In my lab senario, I have the following:

Internal PC :
IP : 10.108.10.10
Mask : 255.255.240.0
GW : 10.108.10.13

ISA (Two NIC's) :
Internal IP : 10.108.10.13
Mask : 255.255.240.0

External IP : 65.122.199.14
Mask : 255.255.255.0

External PC:
IP : 65.122.199.15
Mask : 255.255.255.0

With NAT enabled on ISA, I can ping 65.122.199.15. With Route enabled, I cannot ping 65.122.199.15. Where in ISA do I need to define the routing statements for setting up access to the "External PC" at 65.122.199.15?

This is a simple senario but I am just trying to prove the concept!

Thanks in advance.

Kevin

Post #: 1

Featured Links*

RE: Changing From Nat to Route in ISA 2006 - 2.Nov.2007 6:38:40 AM

bizzsarc

Posts: 7
Joined: 30.Oct.2007
Status: offline

Hey Kevin

First!

You don�t what to route from private to public! You NAT from private to public IP-addresses!

This is what you do.

Internal PC :
IP : 10.108.10.10
Mask : 255.255.255.0
GW : 10.108.10.1

ISA (Two NIC's) :
Internal IP : 10.108.10.1
Mask : 255.255.255.0

External IP : 10.108.11.1
Mask : 255.255.255.0

External PC:
IP : 10.108.11.2
Mask : 255.255.255.0

Change the Network Rule between Internal and External to route. You allready did that.

Make an Access Rule which give Internal PC access to External PC. For instance all Outbound (test scenario).

From the Internal computer, PING the External and see that happens.

Why do you want to route between Private and Public IP-addresses.?

//Bizzsarc

(in reply to SPI)

Post #: 2