h code below 12.1, and it works
> fine, no mapping needed. I wonder why they would change that, interesting
> though.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: EA Louie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2001 6:39 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subjec
"'EA Louie'" ;
Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2001 4:04 PM
Subject: RE: NAT and Telnet [7:20362]
> I have routers functioning like this with code below 12.1, and it works
> fine, no mapping needed. I wonder why they would change that, interesting
> though.
>
> ---
]
Subject: Re: NAT and Telnet [7:20362]
Guy...yes, you're correct - I mapped port 23 on the outside to 23 on a
loopback... and one of my study buddies just called and told me it's a new
'feature' of 12.1 and higher to deny incoming on the outside interface.
Some firewall feature gets e
elnet to the
outside interface unless that 'conduit' is opened using nat inside source
static. I might downgrade to 12.0 tonight to see if that's true.
-e-
- Original Message -
From: "Lupi, Guy"
To: "'EA Louie'" ;
Sent: Wednesday, September 1
- Original Message -
From: "John Neiberger"
To:
Cc:
Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2001 1:17 PM
Subject: Re: NAT and Telnet [7:20362]
> Might this have something to do with differences in the way NAT treats
> TCP vs. ICMP? I haven't worked with NAT much so
Did you have to map port 23 of the outside interface to port 23 of the
inside interface?
Something like this:
ip nat inside source static tcp 192.168.1.1 23 208.2.2.2 23
-Original Message-
From: EA Louie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2001 1:28 AM
To: [EMAIL
lected' ;-) ---
more
below
- Original Message -
From: "Chuck Larrieu"
To: "EA Louie" ;
Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2001 10:31 AM
Subject: RE: NAT and Telnet [7:20362]
> I'll have to think about the solution for a bit, but the reason it
happens
> is rea
okay... we'll be waiting for your thoughts to be 'collected' ;-) --- more
below
- Original Message -
From: "Chuck Larrieu"
To: "EA Louie" ;
Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2001 10:31 AM
Subject: RE: NAT and Telnet [7:20362]
> I'll have to
I'll have to think about the solution for a bit, but the reason it happens
is really quite simple. I posted a problem like this a "Friday Folly" or a
"Weekend Folly" a couple of months back.
think in terms of router operation. e.g. what happens when a packet is
received on an interface.
knowing
9 matches
Mail list logo
