looking for recommendation for cisco NAT device

Discussion in 'Cisco' started by dtedrick, Jun 26, 2004.

  1. dtedrick

    dtedrick Guest

    this is the current set up

    device1\
    device2-- 3640 -- Internet
    device3/

    device# all have dozens of virtual interfaces.
    as an example:

    device1 device2 device3
    net1 10.1.1.10 10.1.1.11 10.1.1.12
    net2 10.1.2.10 10.1.2.11 10.1.2.12
    etc

    these are then natted by a pair of 3640 routers.
    as an example all hosts in net1 would be natted to a single public ip and
    all hosts in net2 would be natted to a different single public ip, etc.

    the traffic from these device# through the routers regularly exceeds
    60Mbps.

    and now the question, is there a better or more specialized device,
    preferably cisco, for this natting task?

    thanks,
    Dan Tedrick
     
    dtedrick, Jun 26, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. I don't know if there is a Cisco product dedicated exclusively to NAT, but
    the closest thing that comes to mind is a higher end Cisco PIX firewall
    appliance. NAT is one of the central features of this product, and if
    you're simply trying to offload NAT processing from the 3640 units, that may
    give you what you need and more.

    FWIW,
    Robert
     
    Bob by The Bay, Jun 26, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. :as an example all hosts in net1 would be natted to a single public ip and
    :all hosts in net2 would be natted to a different single public ip, etc.

    :the traffic from these device# through the routers regularly exceeds
    :60Mbps.

    All of the PIX 5xx models support at least 60 Mbps cleartext,
    but as you wouldn't want to be pushing close to 100% CPU, I'd suggest
    a 515E (188 Mbps) or 525 (330 Mbps)

    On the other hand, you mention having lots of virtual interfaces.
    Some of the PIX 5xx series handle 802.1Q vlans, but you have to
    go to 535 to get more than about 10 vlans. (Unfortunately my
    comparision chart is not online but you can find the information
    by googling some of my past posts in this newsgroup.)
     
    Walter Roberson, Jun 26, 2004
    #3
  4. dtedrick

    dtedrick Guest

    reckon keeping the current setup is the way to go. there is no need to
    offload the work these routers are doing, I was just wondering if there
    was a better (and cheap) device as the environment is being overhauled.

    thanks for the repsonses.

    Dan Tedrick
     
    dtedrick, Jun 29, 2004
    #4
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.