|
charou
10 posts
 |
Hi Folks, Looking for some input into the following scenario: I work for a retailer who is migrating their ATM's (or ABM's) onto their IP network. The processor (3rd party co.) wants to do one-to-one NAT'ing. The processor has a point-to-point link in our DC (retailer's) and they don't want to route our IP's on their network. We have more than 200 ATM's and this will amount to an equivalent number of static NAT statements on the my PIX. Is it reasonable to configure this many statics (i.e. one-to-one mappings)? I'm wondering if there's a way to circumvent this scenario. Also, considering that in the future, ATM's will be added and removed and all this creates unnecessary administration (in my opinion). Thanks in advance for comments/suggestions. Charou |
|
brad_fleming
11 posts
 |
Whether its reasonable is a question of how often they change and how many people will deal with management of the system. To me the real question is: What will 1-to-1 NAT provide that a simple default deny-all policy doesn't achieve? Adding NAT/PAT introduces all kinds of new things that can break and cause problems, IMHO. |
Viewing 1 - 2 of 2
- 1