Doesn't NAT break multicast as well?

-
James D. Wilson
"non sunt multiplicanda entia praeter necessitatem"
William of Ockham (1285-1347/49)


-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Ben Nagy
Sent: Monday, May 24, 1999 6:19 PM
To: 'Jen'
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE:


There are some things that just don't work through NAT. MS WINS and MS
NETLOGON are a couple of examples. I seem to remember that MS
Netmeeting is
another potential candidate although some implementations of NAT have
been
"fixed" to deal with it. The problems usually arise when the payload
of the
packet (rather than the IP header) contains the source address, and
the
target application uses the address from the _payload_ instead of the
address from the _header_ to send its reply to.

Note that the subnetting thing I talked about only gives you 128 (126)
internal LAN addresses if you want to have a single broadcast domain
because
you need to stitch up all the "odd" subnets by multihoming your
internal
Ethernet interface. Ew. A much much better solution if you can't use
NAT
(you poor thing) is to buy a class C and then buy another couple of IP
addresses from your ISP to use as the external addresses. If you only
need 2
as in the diagram (ie you don't want a DMZ) a 255.255.255.252 netmask
will
suffice.

I dunno if I should expound much on the subnetting thing...it's
confusing
but not really apropos firewalls. Maybe mail me offlist, ask_.

--
Ben Nagy
Network Consultant, CPM&S Group of Companies
Direct Dial: (08) 8422 8319 Mobile: (0414) 411 520
 -----Original Message-----
From:   Jen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent:   Tuesday, May 25, 1999 1:43 PM
To:     Ben Nagy
Cc:     'Paul Gracy'; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:        Re:

[EMAIL PROTECTED],

Out of curiosity, why wouldn't you want to use private addresses?  If
the issue is that you want to have a Web server at a.b.c.4, a mail
server at a.b.c.5, an ftp server at a.b.c.6, etc., then you can
achieve
this with NAT on the firewall.

I think the confusion might be that you're thinking that the firewall
can only do one sort of NAT, which is masquerading (where all private
addresses translate to a single registered IP address). You can also
do
static NAT where

10.0.0.192 translates to a.b.c.4
10.0.0.231 translates to a.b.c.5

so on and so forth.

Some firewall products enable this (e.g., Checkpoint FW-1). Some do
not
(e.g., WatchGuard Firebox).  Just make sure you get a firewall with
the
feature set you're interested in.

Jen

Ben Nagy wrote:
>
> Couldn't you just tell the firewall specifically which IP addresses
are in
> the trusted network and which weren't? Failing that can you variably
subnet
> your class C so the firewall thinks of them as different networks?
> That's assuming that you really need to avoid using NAT, which is
generally
> contraindicated....
>
> --
> Ben Nagy
> Network Consultant, CPM&S Group of Companies
> Direct Dial: (08) 8422 8319 Mobile: (0414) 411 520
>  -----Original Message-----
> From:   Paul Gracy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent:   Tuesday, May 25, 1999 2:43 AM
> To:     [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject:        RE:
>
> The biggest problem with this design is not the firewall.. it's the
routing
> table...
>
> I've never tried, but I think PIX might be able to do this based on
> aliases... but you really need to rethink your design and get your
subnets
> separated somehow or you're going to have issues, no matter whose
firewall
> you choose.
>
> IMHO.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ask - [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, May 21, 1999 5:53 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject:
>
> Hi,
> Do anyone know what firewall product that can do this
>
> Internet -------  Router -------- Firewall ----- Internal
>
> where
> Router ip is a.b.c.1
> Firewall ip is a.b.c.2
> Internal ip is a class C register IP addresss a.b.c.3 -- a.b.c.254
>
> The normal firewall product is require to have one register IP and
> the internal lan is in private IP address. And all internet services
is
> go
> through the proxy Firewall.
> What I am looking for is that the Firewall can able to protected the
> internal Lan  with the internal ip is a range of register internet
IP
> address instead of the private IP (192.168.x.x.). The Firewall is
only
> open
> up those allow services to go out like http, ftp ,  etc...
>
> The Firewall can be software or hardware solution.
>
> Thanks.
>
> ______________________________________________________
> Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
> -
> [To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
> "unsubscribe firewalls" in the body of the message.]
> -
> [To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
> "unsubscribe firewalls" in the body of the message.]
> -
> [To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
> "unsubscribe firewalls" in the body of the message.]
-
[To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
"unsubscribe firewalls" in the body of the message.]

-
[To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
"unsubscribe firewalls" in the body of the message.]

Reply via email to