About singh

singh · 04-26-2005

Is there a way I can block all instant messenger for the company so nobody can do IM messaging for the corporate. I have a PIX 520.

singh · 03-04-2005

I like to block ip range for 64.68.96.0 with 64.68.127.255 as subnet mask at PIX 520.conduit deny tcp host 64.68.96.0 subnet mask 64.68.127.255 0 0I don't want to use any access list.

singh · 02-24-2005

I have a cisco PIX 520. I like to block any incoming connection from www.mywebexpc.com only to a certain outside IP address that is used for our clients. Is there a way I can do this. Just incoming not outgoing for the above mentioned website. I don'...

singh · 02-06-2004

We are planning on having a site to site VPN setupbetween two PIX firewalls. Site1 has 192.16.10.0 on the inside network and is the HQ. ( Head Quaters). This site contains most all the server and resources that site 2 would need access to.Site2 has i...

singh · 03-08-2005

I tried gave me a syntax error.As I mentioned earlier:64.68.96.0 is the Ip range 64.68.127.255 is the subnet mask for that range.

singh · 03-02-2005

I don't want to block it at the router level. I want to do this on PIX level. Although I think I do get the concept.

singh · 02-09-2004

Thanks Man ! Thats what I thought so. It should be really straight forward as you mentioned.Thanks !

singh · 02-06-2004

Yes, Both have their own donmains, dns and Wins.To setup trust they shoudl atleast be able to ping by name. I think I will be able to ping by Ip after site to site VPN but by name would be a problem. Although I i know name is dependant on WINS. My qu...

Member Since	‎02-06-2004 10:14 AM
Date Last Visited	‎08-18-2017 03:51 AM
Posts	8

User Statistics

User Activity

Blocking Instant messanger for the company.

Is this correct for PIX Firewall.

Blocking mywebexpc.com

Site to site VPN resources

Re: Is this correct for PIX Firewall.

Re: Blocking mywebexpc.com

Re: Site to site VPN resources

Re: Site to site VPN resources