No NAT between two routers

You can use an access-list to define what get's NATed and what doesn't

eg.

access-list 120 deny ip 192.168.101.0 0.0.0.255 192.168.201 0.0.0.255 access-list 120 permit ip any any

ip nat inside source list 120 pool YOURPOOL overload

So here traffic is only NATed if it matches the permit of the acl. If it mattches the first statement (destined for the other private network) then NAT is not applied.

Chris.

Awesome. Thanks Chris for your suggestion. I'll let you know if and when it works.

So I did as you said and it's still not working. I turned on 'debug ip nat detailed' and did some pings and such, and it never showed up in the debug stuff so I assume what you told me is doing its job. I guess the next place to look is my ip routes.

Here's the scenario:

Router #1 has an external IP of xxx.yyy.11.62, is connected to xxx.yyy.

The non-routable network 192.168.101.0/24 sits behind Router #1, and the non-routable network 192.168.201.0/24 sits behind router #2. I made the additions you suggested above to both routers (switching ip addresses when necessary), and also added the following routes:

Router #1 -- ip route 192.168.201.0 255.255.255.0 xxx.yyy.11.62 Router #2 -- ip route 192.168.101.0 255.255.255.0 xxx.yyy.11.126

So... are the routes I added above not correct? Can you specify a forwarding router's address that isn't directly connected to the router you're adding the route command to?

A static route should point to a next hop IP address, ie. the next device along the path. It sounds as though you have another router (or routers) in the middle of #1 and #2. Do the routers in the middle have routes to both private networks. What does "sh ip route" on #1 and #2 show? How are xxx.yyy.11.1 and xxx.yyy.11.65 connected?

Chris.

Do you have a third router that connects both of them to the Internet? In that case, the simplest solution is to do all the NAT on the Internet router, not the internal routers.