Re: Double NAT Question
From: Matt Gibson (mattg_at_blueedgetech.ca)
Date: 03/16/05
- Next message: James Ellison: "SMS2003 installation probs -- IE"
- Previous message: Techieluvr: "Double NAT Question"
- In reply to: Techieluvr: "Double NAT Question"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 09:05:01 -0800
Your setup is perfectly fine, I've got similar setups running at most of my
clients.
Yes, it provides an extra layer of security, in that you have to open up a
port in both firewalls to let something in, and you're less likely to make a
mistake in both. It's less secure in that you have two firewalls to keep
track of, and maintain.
There's no way this slows down network traffic for a network of SBS size.
Matt Gibson - GSEC
"Techieluvr" <nkim@ccef.org> wrote in message
news:1110992461.157265.294110@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
> All-
>
> Running SBS2K, two nics, and Netopia 4522 router over T1.
>
> My router is doing NAT and so is ISA. Until today, I thought a double
> NAT setup was a bad thing but a quick perusal through some of the
> threads on this topic indicates otherwise. I'm understanding that
> double NAT provides an extra layer of security. Am I correct?
>
> I was going to stop the router from doing NAT and let ISA do it because
> I find network slow (i.e., web browsing). My thinking is that double
> NAT slows network. However, I'm not so sure that I'm willing to trade
> the extra layer of security that double NAT provides for faster
> browsing.
>
> I'd welcome any response on the above remarks and whether I'm right or
> wrong in my understanding.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Techieluvr
>
- Next message: James Ellison: "SMS2003 installation probs -- IE"
- Previous message: Techieluvr: "Double NAT Question"
- In reply to: Techieluvr: "Double NAT Question"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
