Firewall Wizards mailing list archives
Re: Say it Ain't So
From: "Jim Leo" <ADMIN () everett pitt cc nc us>
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 1997 14:59:49 EST5EDT
I appreciate all the responses. Factual Data: 1. We have four Class C's ( 2 on one side & 2 on the other) 2. We have a Cisco 2501 (2 ether) router 3. The 'outside' of the Cisco (csu/dsu) IP belongs to an 'upstream' entity. 4. All four Class C's are legal.... 5. When the firewall was 'dropped in' on the first try everything behind it ceased to have access even to other hosts on the inside. I'm presuming the Network Administrator ( I'm Network Operations) wished to have a 'psuedo' Class A/B under their control. However, no one is owning up to anything at this point in time. To the gentleman who mentioned scope creep; I think that the upstream entity has the firewall installers 'in their pocket' and it was their approach to conserving their regional 'net-blk'.... Thanks for the sparkling wit and dry humour... I'm off to 'NT Core Technology' training this coming week. Since the boss decided I'm supporting NT already might as well get trained. Jim Leo admin () everett pitt cc nc us
Current thread:
- Re: Say it ain't so, (continued)
- Re: Say it ain't so Neil Ratzlaff (Sep 18)
- Re: Say it ain't so Colin Campbell (Sep 18)
- Re: Say it ain't so Paul D. Robertson (Sep 18)
- Re: Say it ain't so Rick Murphy (Sep 19)
- Re: Say it ain't so Paul D. Robertson (Sep 19)
- Re: Say it ain't so Carl Friedberg, carl () comets com (Sep 19)
- Re: Say it ain't so jim (Sep 18)
- RE: Say it ain't so Giesinger, Nick HE0 (Sep 18)
- Re: Say it ain't so Sandeep_Talwar (Sep 18)
- RE: Say it ain't so Russ (Sep 19)
- Re: Say it Ain't So Jim Leo (Sep 19)