https://community.extremenetworks.com/t5/extremewireless-general/secure-tunnel-behind-nat/m-p/28613#M172 About the secure tunnel option, when the controller is deployed behind NAT this is not supported at this moment.<BR /> known issues:<BR /> <BR /> o Availability pair, if two Controller behind NAT can’t be identified<BR /> o Image upgrade fails if Controller behind NAT<BR /> <BR /> When do we support secure tunnel for controllers behind a NAT device?<BR /> <BR /> Thx.<BR /> <BR /> Niels Thu, 24 Apr 2014 16:35:00 GMT Niels_Boesten 2014-04-24T16:35:00Z https://community.extremenetworks.com/t5/extremewireless-general/secure-tunnel-behind-nat/m-p/28613#M172 About the secure tunnel option, when the controller is deployed behind NAT this is not supported at this moment.<BR /> known issues:<BR /> <BR /> o Availability pair, if two Controller behind NAT can’t be identified<BR /> o Image upgrade fails if Controller behind NAT<BR /> <BR /> When do we support secure tunnel for controllers behind a NAT device?<BR /> <BR /> Thx.<BR /> <BR /> Niels Thu, 24 Apr 2014 16:35:00 GMT https://community.extremenetworks.com/t5/extremewireless-general/secure-tunnel-behind-nat/m-p/28613#M172 Niels_Boesten 2014-04-24T16:35:00Z https://community.extremenetworks.com/t5/extremewireless-general/secure-tunnel-behind-nat/m-p/28614#M173 Updated: If the controller is behind a NAT'd interface the access point will only learn the private side address during the registration process not the public address. At this time it's not a supported configuration. <BR /> <BR /> -Doug Wed, 11 Mar 2015 04:36:00 GMT https://community.extremenetworks.com/t5/extremewireless-general/secure-tunnel-behind-nat/m-p/28614#M173 Doug 2015-03-11T04:36:00Z