Subject: RE: IP NAT broken in the past?
To: Michael G. Schabert <mikeride@prez.org>
From: Lindgren, Jon <jlindgren@espus.com>
List: port-alpha
Date: 07/08/1999 12:51:20
This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.
------_=_NextPart_001_01BEC961.C909E8F0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="windows-1252"
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael G. Schabert [mailto:mikeride@prez.org]
> Sent: Thursday, July 08, 1999 11:12 AM
> To: Lindgren, Jon
> Subject: Re: IP NAT broken in the past?
>
>
> Hi Jon,
> I've used NAT consistently while staying fairly -current on
> my alpha, & it's always worked. There was a problem with routing
> or something awhile back that had to do with it swapping bits on
> addresses, but I never experienced it. You should be able to
> upgrade safely.
Mike,
Thanks for the info. Judging from other's responses, it must somehow be my
fault that NAT isn't working for me on 1.3.3, so back to digging I go!
Just as an aside, anything else regarding 1.4 that pops into mind? Any
caveats? Honestly, I guess I'm not sure whether or not to wait for 1.4.1
(to let the 1.4 release stabilize...). I think it's drilled into my brain
that I should always wait for the revision after a major release.
I'd appreciate any opinions you [or anyone else] could offer.
Thanks 10e6!
-Jon Lindgren
"My employer apologizes for their love of markup."
------_=_NextPart_001_01BEC961.C909E8F0
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV=3D"Content-Type" CONTENT=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Dwindows-1252">
<META NAME=3D"Generator" CONTENT=3D"MS Exchange Server version =
5.5.2232.0">
<TITLE>RE: IP NAT broken in the past?</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>> -----Original Message-----</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> From: Michael G. Schabert [<A =
HREF=3D"mailto:mikeride@prez.org">mailto:mikeride@prez.org</A>]</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> Sent: Thursday, July 08, 1999 11:12 AM</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> To: Lindgren, Jon</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> Subject: Re: IP NAT broken in the past?</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> Hi Jon,</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> I've used NAT consistently while staying fairly =
-current on </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> my alpha, & it's always worked. There was a =
problem with routing</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> or something awhile back that had to do with it =
swapping bits on</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> addresses, but I never experienced it. You =
should be able to</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> upgrade safely.</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>Mike,</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>Thanks for the info. Judging from other's =
responses, it must somehow be my fault that NAT isn't working for me on =
1.3.3, so back to digging I go!</FONT></P>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>Just as an aside, anything else regarding 1.4 that =
pops into mind? Any caveats? Honestly, I guess I'm not sure =
whether or not to wait for 1.4.1 (to let the 1.4 release =
stabilize...). I think it's drilled into my brain that I should =
always wait for the revision after a major release.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>I'd appreciate any opinions you [or anyone else] =
could offer.</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>Thanks 10e6!</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>-Jon Lindgren</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2> "My employer apologizes for their love of =
markup."</FONT>
</P>
</BODY>
</HTML>
------_=_NextPart_001_01BEC961.C909E8F0--