On Fri, 8 Jun 2001, Lopez, Robert wrote:
> establish a session. This is where my problem lies...the citrix server ip
> address will change once it's in the new subnet...the client will not be
> able to connect.
>
> It was suggested that we implement NAT to allow the client to connect to
the
> citrix server. This is a quick snapshot of what we have...
I'm assuming that notifying the users and having them change the IP is not
a feasable option?
Even if you DID use NAT to translate the old IP to the new IP, client-side
changes will have to be made. (and i think the server will bave to be set
up appropriately too..I'm only familar with the client side.)
The client end will have to, going from a bad memory, change their
firewall settings to allow them to connect to the server-behind-nat.
There is an option along the lines of "use alternate IP address" or
something...its been about 4 months since I did this and havent been in
front of a citrix client in at least 2...its a well documented bit.
The /better/ solution of course would be to assign a FQDN to the IP
addresses and have the clients change to THAT, so that it is only done
once...and then you can change the IP at will.
~shrug~
...david
> NAT config on cat6509sw1r1
> ip nat inside source static 10.101.99.20 164.42.100.25
If I read this right, it appears that you are doing the translation at the
/client/ end, not the server end...that is totally wierd, to me.
But, in that case, should that not be
ip nat OUTSIDE source static
since that is the direction we need to go?
but I'm still rather confused why you are doing the NAT at the client side
instead of the server side..
....david
---
david raistrick (deep in the south georgia woods)
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=7766&t=7709
--------------------------------------------------
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
