I think that the cleanest design would be one where the two connected LANs use distinct subnets. This should not be a problem given the wide range of private addresses available. If however there are overlapping addresses, you could configure NAT on one side. I would go in for static NAT for the entire network on one site. This will allow either site to initiate a connetion to the other.
Think of the MPLS VPN as a distinctly logical subnet with access lists that totally restrict its traffic to just its own subnet, and to nowhere else. In that context, you can use whatever IP address range that you desire. The problem crops up when you need this vpn subnet to communicate to the "outside" world, that is outside of its vpn subnet..... its address schema had better be unique!
This communications need is called "MPLS Leaking" in which the vpn is "leaked" into the BGP routing tables to see the outside. The outside world is then, via BGP, made aware of this vpn subnet, hence again the need for distinct IP addressing. Sure you can use NAT/PAT, and you can also use IP schemas that are distinct classes such as a /28 out of the same IP block as the /24.
But, again, the IP block must be unique or MPLS will give you grief via BGP.
DocumentationCode download linksGoalRequirementLimitationsSupported ISR and UCS-E ModelSupported ISRG2 and UCS-E Blades:Supported ISR4K and UCS-E Blades:Step by Step ConfigurationConfigure one of the connectivity options to access the Cisco IMC from the n...
Firepower Threat Defense (NGFWv) on UCS E-series - Transparent Mode in HA
DocumentationCode download linksGoalRequirementLimitationsSupported ISR and UCS-E ModelSupported ISRG2 and UCS-E Blades:Supported ISR4K and UCS-E Blades:Step by Step ConfigurationCo...
I am currently unable to specify "crypto keyring" command when configuring VPN connection on my cisco 2901 router.
The following licenses have been activated on my router :