Firewalls: Re: Routing, FW-1, and NAT

Firewalls
(September 1997)

Indexed By Thread: [Previous] [Next]

Subject:	Re: Routing, FW-1, and NAT
From:	Travis Low <tlow @ mindq . com>
Date:	Mon, 08 Sep 1997 10:45:16 -0400
To:	drexx @ pspi . com . ph (Drexx Laggui), firewalls @ greatcircle . com

At 01:25 PM 9/6/97 -0800, Drexx Laggui (drexx @
 pspi .
 com .
 ph) wrote:
>
>I have assumed that internal RIP use is critical because the 192.9.x.x
>addresses are very active in the Internet (eg: www.sun.com = 192.9.9.100).
>Can anybody prove me otherwise?

Depending on the size and stability of your network, you could use static
routing.  It's a lot more predictable than RIP.

Travis

Indexed By Date	Previous:	Re: NSA backdoors in OS From: "Joseph S. D. Yao" <jsdy @ cospo . osis . gov>
Indexed By Date	Next:	Re: NSA backdoors in OS From: spencerj @ dg-rtp . dg . com (Jon Spencer)
Indexed By Thread	Previous:	Re: Routing, FW-1, and NAT From: Ryan Russell/SYBASE <Ryan . Russell @ sybase . com>
Indexed By Thread	Next:	RE: "Tasteless Plug" From: Stephen Greenwalt <StephenG @ DENVERSYS . COM>