Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu,  9 May 2002 10:00:45 -0700 (PDT)
From:      "Nielsen" <nielsen@memberwebs.com>
To:        <freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG>
Subject:   Re: ipnat  and bimapping
Message-ID:  <20020509170045.5584B37B414@hub.freebsd.org>
References:  <3CDA988D.34E2148C@centtech.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Works for me. The two ranges also don't overlap. In my experience, however,
even if they do ipnat is smart enough to handle certain overlapping subnets
properly. I think last rule wins.

----- Original Message -----
> Would bimap'ing the 24.24.24.1/32 address to 10.10.20.2/32 work?  Or would
that
> screw up my nat'ing of the 10.10.10.0/24 net?  I need all ports NOT nat'ed
to
> 10.10.10.0/24 to go to 10.10.20.2/32.  Am I asking for trouble on the
protected
> net, or is this safe?  Is bimap the right thing to use?
>
> How big is the gun that I am about to use to shoot myself in the foot?
>
> Eric



To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020509170045.5584B37B414>