<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Re: pix and microsoft ISA server in Network Security</title>
    <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/pix-and-microsoft-isa-server/m-p/126504#M615489</link>
    <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Why do you want to put ISA infront of the pix? If you are using ISA for web caching, all of that traffic will need to cross the PIX, which can be avoided if it were behind it. Also, if you plan to use the PIX for vpn, you might have problems in that configuration, but that is just conjecture on my ancient experience with the dreadful ms proxy server 2.0. &lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Thu, 07 Aug 2003 13:51:14 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>mostiguy</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2003-08-07T13:51:14Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>pix and microsoft ISA server</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/pix-and-microsoft-isa-server/m-p/126503#M615487</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Have anyone implemented an ISA infront of a pix and&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;did you have any problems configuring the process?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 21 Feb 2020 06:54:48 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/pix-and-microsoft-isa-server/m-p/126503#M615487</guid>
      <dc:creator>oevans</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-02-21T06:54:48Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: pix and microsoft ISA server</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/pix-and-microsoft-isa-server/m-p/126504#M615489</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Why do you want to put ISA infront of the pix? If you are using ISA for web caching, all of that traffic will need to cross the PIX, which can be avoided if it were behind it. Also, if you plan to use the PIX for vpn, you might have problems in that configuration, but that is just conjecture on my ancient experience with the dreadful ms proxy server 2.0. &lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 07 Aug 2003 13:51:14 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/pix-and-microsoft-isa-server/m-p/126504#M615489</guid>
      <dc:creator>mostiguy</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2003-08-07T13:51:14Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: pix and microsoft ISA server</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/pix-and-microsoft-isa-server/m-p/126505#M615491</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;I new you would say that.  I myself thought of the&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;headache I would probably face.  Off-course one &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;would put the ISA behind the pix which is what&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I have now in production.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;But I wanted to test a unique application, that's&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;why I asked the question.  Anyway, thanks for&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;your reply, I may embark on it some time in the future.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 07 Aug 2003 14:12:09 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/pix-and-microsoft-isa-server/m-p/126505#M615491</guid>
      <dc:creator>oevans</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2003-08-07T14:12:09Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

