From owner-freebsd-stable Sun Jan 30 12:14:52 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mail.cybcon.com (mail.cybcon.com [216.190.188.5]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8185E15060 for ; Sun, 30 Jan 2000 12:14:48 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from freebsd@cybcon.com) Received: from laptop.cybcon.com (william@pm3b-18.cybcon.com [205.147.75.83]) by mail.cybcon.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA08489; Sun, 30 Jan 2000 12:15:00 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: X-Mailer: XFMail 1.4.0 on FreeBSD X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <200001301834.LAA13968@nomad.yogotech.com> Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2000 12:10:10 -0800 (PST) From: William Woods To: Nate Williams Subject: Re: FW: DSL natd rules.... Cc: Doug White , freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG, Coleman Kane Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > The original configuration worked well, and I don't think you would > notice any problems using the double-NAT configuration whatsoever, > although you could simply hook all your boxs directly to the Cisco and > use it that way instead, which may be easier for you. > > The NAT implementation on the cisco seemed to work quite well... I would but I want the FreeBSD box to be a firewall for the LAN > > Nate ---------------------------------- E-Mail: William Woods Date: 30-Jan-00 Time: 12:08:51 This message was sent by XFMail ---------------------------------- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message