<?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 315e in Network Security</title>
    <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/pix-315e/m-p/110532#M709102</link>
    <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;VPN connectivity is configured separately in most part to routing and NAT translation, if that's what you're trying to determine (your question is a little unclear).&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;VPn configuration is shown here:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;A class="jive-link-custom" href="http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/707/index.shtml#pix" target="_blank"&gt;http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/707/index.shtml#pix&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;whereas being able to use your existing IP addresses for your interior LAN's is simply a matter of defining the right address on the inside interface of the PIX, defining any static routes necessary to get to other internal networks, then if you don't want to do NAT at all, use the "nat (inside) 0 0 0" command.  The command reference is here:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;A class="jive-link-custom" href="http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/iaabu/pix/pix_sw/v_62/cmdref/index.htm" target="_blank"&gt;http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/iaabu/pix/pix_sw/v_62/cmdref/index.htm&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Tue, 06 Aug 2002 00:46:27 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>gfullage</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2002-08-06T00:46:27Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>PIX 315e</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/pix-315e/m-p/110531#M709072</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Can you suggest a method to configure the PIX 315e firewall to handle Internet (VPN) connections and at the same time allow us to utilize our Public IP addressing scheme for our interion LANs (i.e. 130.xxx.xxx.xxx)? The Internet host PCs will utilize a private IP addressing scheme (i.e. 10.xxx.xxx.xxx). &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks... &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;mark&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 21 Feb 2020 06:11:07 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/pix-315e/m-p/110531#M709072</guid>
      <dc:creator>mafriedman</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-02-21T06:11:07Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: PIX 315e</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/pix-315e/m-p/110532#M709102</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;VPN connectivity is configured separately in most part to routing and NAT translation, if that's what you're trying to determine (your question is a little unclear).&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;VPn configuration is shown here:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;A class="jive-link-custom" href="http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/707/index.shtml#pix" target="_blank"&gt;http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/707/index.shtml#pix&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;whereas being able to use your existing IP addresses for your interior LAN's is simply a matter of defining the right address on the inside interface of the PIX, defining any static routes necessary to get to other internal networks, then if you don't want to do NAT at all, use the "nat (inside) 0 0 0" command.  The command reference is here:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;A class="jive-link-custom" href="http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/iaabu/pix/pix_sw/v_62/cmdref/index.htm" target="_blank"&gt;http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/iaabu/pix/pix_sw/v_62/cmdref/index.htm&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 06 Aug 2002 00:46:27 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/pix-315e/m-p/110532#M709102</guid>
      <dc:creator>gfullage</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2002-08-06T00:46:27Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: PIX 315e</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/pix-315e/m-p/110533#M709125</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks for your reply.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;This question was in response to a consultant who claimed that we could not use the PIX 315e and maintain our internal (public) IP addressing scheme if our remote laptops were to access our WAN via an Internet connection.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;He claimed that there is no way the host could find a server within our internal WAN if the Server used a public IP address (i.e. 130.xxx.xxx.xxx).  I felt he was incorrect, but needed input from  someone with more knowledge about the Cisco system.   He said that if there was a way to do this, he'd like someone to show him how it could be done.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 06 Aug 2002 12:54:39 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/pix-315e/m-p/110533#M709125</guid>
      <dc:creator>mafriedman</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2002-08-06T12:54:39Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

