[144379] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: NAT444 or ?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Mark Tinka)
Sat Sep 10 01:50:29 2011
From: Mark Tinka <mtinka@globaltransit.net>
To: nanog@nanog.org
Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2011 13:49:39 +0800
In-Reply-To: <D181DDABABE57E4DB72FEE00331478643BC0F1@EALPO1.ukbroadband.com>
Reply-To: mtinka@globaltransit.net
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
--nextPart1867613.N1LK5QD1vC
Content-Type: Text/Plain;
charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Thursday, September 08, 2011 04:52:56 PM Leigh Porter=20
wrote:
> Well if you buy the 'right' solution then you can re-use
> it elsewhere. Many solutions use multi-purpose
> processing cards to deliver NAT functionality which can
> be used for other stuff such as firewalling or some
> other manor of traffic mangling.
You'll be hard-pressed to NOT find a vendor willing to sell=20
you the "right" solution for the "easy way out" :-).
Mark.
--nextPart1867613.N1LK5QD1vC
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc
Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.16 (GNU/Linux)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=5P98
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--nextPart1867613.N1LK5QD1vC--
