"Darren R. Weber" wrote:
On Wed, 29 Dec 1999, you wrote:
Steve Jardine wrote: <snip> I have heard the consept of IP Masquerading, many boxes going through one IP, refered to as NAT+ with Netgear ISDN/Modem routers, and PAT from a Cisco PIX firewall. I believe they all refer the the same thing. If someone knows.
Sam
You are right as far as I know. I haven't read the full RFC on NAT so I can't speak for the definition, but in the form that Cisco implements it you are correct. We use Cisco products here at our company also and it does just as you suggest translating private numbering into a range of valid IPs - not hiding all machines behind one IP. I also have to qualify that though. I did not set up our routing personally so I don't know what all our options may have been.
Steve mentioned PAT (Port address translation) which is not just a PIX option, but available in the router IOS also. It's true that PAT is a closer fit with the Limux concept of IP Masquerading, but Cisco's perspective is that PAT is a sub-set (conceptually) of NAT. Which makes sense - In general you are doing address translation, what differs is whether it's one-to-one or many-to-one/one-to-many. So everybody is kinda rightish!! Sean PS I must be feeling very seasonal - defining a Cisco concept when I, professionally speaking, regard them as the arch-enemy!! You don't know what I mean? Well, you know how Linux folk feel about Microsoft? Well, many Nortel Networks folk feel the same way about Cisco!!! ;-)) -- To unsubscribe send e-mail to suse-linux-e-unsubscribe@suse.com For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the FAQ at http://www.suse.com/Support/Doku/FAQ/