RE: [Full-Disclosure] PIX vs CheckPoint

["Abraham, Antony (Cognizant)" <Antony.Abraham@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Then you would have some static statement which covers the network in 
questions. PIX need some sort of translation for its ASA (Adaptive Security 
Algorithm) to work, so a "static" covers the network range would do...

-Antony

-----Original Message-----
From: full-disclosure-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
[mailto:full-disclosure-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Cyril Guibourg
Sent: Wednesday, June 30, 2004 2:18 PM
To: Otero, Hernan (EDS)
Cc: full-disclosure@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [Full-Disclosure] PIX vs CheckPoint

"Otero, Hernan         (EDS)" <HOtero@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> I think you do, because at least a nat 0 it´s needed to get traffic passing
> through the pix.

This is odd, I do have a running config under 6.2 without any nat statement.

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html



This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are for the sole use of the 
intended recipient(s
and may contain confidential and privileged information.If you are not the 
intended recipient,
please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the 
original message.
Any unauthorised review, use, disclosure, dissemination, forwarding, printing 
or copying
of this email or any action taken in reliance on this e-mail is strictly 
prohibited and may be
unlawful.

 Visit us at http://www.cognizant.com

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html