IP address blocked by MSE

AndyPix

^^ OK !!!!!! if you own the whole routed block but that set up is stupid.


Why on earth would you waste a public IP on an internal device like that ?? there is precisly zero to be gained.
The whole point of a public IP is because you want all the traffic to go to it, but you are firewalling some out it may as well be a port forward on the gateway :huh:


I have now officially heard it all


edit : cross posted again - was referring to post 2 up

onomatopoeia99

arciere wrote: »

What you are describing is a NAT.

It's not NAT, it's normal routing. NAT is something different and involves rewriting ("translating") the IP addresses and ports in the headers of the packets traversing the device providing NAT. In the scenario described, IP address 1.1.1.2 arrives at the machine with 1.1.1.1 on its WAN interface and leaves (if not rejected by a firewall) on its LAN interface still having 1.1.1.2 in the header. No address translation has taken place, so it's really, really not NAT that was described.

arciere

onomatopoeia99 wrote: »

It's not NAT, it's normal routing. NAT is something different and involves rewriting ("translating") the IP addresses and ports in the headers of the packets traversing the device providing NAT. In the scenario described, IP address 1.1.1.2 arrives at the machine with 1.1.1.1 on its WAN interface and leaves (if not rejected by a firewall) on its LAN interface still having 1.1.1.2 in the header. No address translation has taken place, so it's really, really not NAT that was described.

Nope, that is indeed NAT. Specifically, it's called 1:1 NAT and it's the most common way of setting up additional IP addresses.
https://wiki.untangle.com/index.php/1:1_NAT
http://www.watchguard.com/help/docs/fireware/12/en-us/Content/en-US/nat/example_1-to-1_NAT.html

AndyPix

Someone missed the networking 101 class