[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Nat

Subject: Nat
From: ahmed.dalaali at hrins.net (Ahmed Munaf)
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2015 19:36:19 +0300
In-reply-to: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <CAMFTxdS7O48YY3jW+TxNF7TS7T3h1r6FvLfo+mCHty99oOfhsg@mail.gmail.com> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>

In addition to the limited concurrent sessions for ASR1000, we are facing some issue with many users how are playing online games! Nat problems! 

Ahmed, 

> On Dec 16, 2015, at 7:22 PM, Mark Tinka <mark.tinka at seacom.mu> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On 16/Dec/15 12:45, Ahmed Munaf wrote:
> 
>> Yes, we are using ASR1004 for NAT, we are considering A10 or Citrix or F5. we?ve not decided till now! 
>> maybe we change it  to another product, if anyone give us a better solution. 
>> 
>> this will be used for ISP?s users. 
> 
> The ASR1000 is not a bad large scale NAT device. Are there any specific
> issues you are facing with it?
> 
> Mark.

Follow-Ups:
- Nat
  - From: mark.tinka at seacom.mu (Mark Tinka)
- Nat
  - From: tony at wicks.co.nz (Tony Wicks)

References:
- Nat
  - From: ahmed.dalaali at hrins.net (Ahmed Munaf)
- Nat
  - From: hf0002+nanog at uah.edu (Hunter Fuller)
- Nat
  - From: ahmed.dalaali at hrins.net (Ahmed Munaf)
- Nat
  - From: mark.tinka at seacom.mu (Mark Tinka)

Prev by Date: Nat
Next by Date: Nat
Previous by thread: Nat
Next by thread: Nat
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread