--On söndag 29 augusti 2004 17.42 -0700 Michel Py
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>> Tracy Smith wrote:
>>> Specifically, to NAT or not to NAT?
>
> This is not much of an issue anymore. If you receive IP addresses from
> your ISP, not natting would be foolish.
No. Renumbering is easy and fun, n
Of course it can work. My point is that it is a fact of life,
nothing more.
Pointing out the obvious: Dependent upon who is/are your upstream
provider(s), and how specific the prefix announcements are made
to their peers (re: your reachability) determines just how symmetric
your traffic pattern
>> Tracy Smith wrote:
>> Specifically, to NAT or not to NAT?
This is not much of an issue anymore. If you receive IP addresses from
your ISP, not natting would be foolish. Even if you do own your own
public IP space, the NAT issues are fundamentally no different than the
firewall ones and since n
On Mon, 30 Aug 2004, Fergie (Paul Ferguson) wrote:
>
>
> Asymmetric paths are a fact of life in the Internet.
>
engineer your network to deal with that (from the enterprise perspective,
not the ISP side) and it's not a problem... we have several customers in
this scenario today, all work well.
Asymmetric paths are a fact of life in the Internet.
- ferg
-- Iljitsch van Beijnum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 30-aug-04, at 0:50, Tracy Smith wrote:
> Hello. I am tyring to gauge what the Best Practices are for
> Enterprise network connections to the Internet. Specifically, to NAT
> o
On 30-aug-04, at 0:50, Tracy Smith wrote:
Hello. I am tyring to gauge what the Best Practices are for
Enterprise network connections to the Internet. Specifically, to NAT
or not to NAT? At what point should NAT-ting be performed ...
exclusively at the Egress point or at decentralized points?
