Firewall Wizards mailing list archives
Re: static nat and tcp limits
From: "Robby Cauwerts" <robby () cauwerts be>
Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2008 17:19:08 +0100
On Fri, Feb 29, 2008 at 11:27 AM, Vladislav Antolik < vladislav.antolik () gmail com> wrote:
What is the best solution; disable nat-control and then disable static record?
Yes. Creating nat rules for traffic that doesn't need to be natted is (in most cases) ... useless. (although some people see this as an additional layer of security) By default in PIX/ASA v7.0 and later the "no nat-control" is the default value. Bye. Robby
_______________________________________________ firewall-wizards mailing list firewall-wizards () listserv icsalabs com https://listserv.icsalabs.com/mailman/listinfo/firewall-wizards
Current thread:
- Re: static nat and tcp limits Fetch, Brandon (Mar 01)
- Re: static nat and tcp limits Vladislav Antolik (Mar 02)
- Re: static nat and tcp limits Fetch, Brandon (Mar 10)
- Re: static nat and tcp limits Vladislav Antolik (Mar 13)
- Re: static nat and tcp limits Fetch, Brandon (Mar 10)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: static nat and tcp limits Robby Cauwerts (Mar 01)
- Re: static nat and tcp limits Vladislav Antolik (Mar 02)