Re: nat concerns

["dreamwvr@dreamwvr.com" <dreamwvr@dreamwvr.com>]

On Fri, Oct 25, 2002 at 01:26:12AM -0700, Chuck Yerkes wrote:
> Realistically, it can't really handle much more than 1 T1.
> IOS 8 couldn't even get THAT through the 2500 series.
> IOS 11 could fill a T1, but that second port is more useful
> for a full failover or a backup 56k (which is how we used it)
> than to have 2 fully used T1s.  Add filtering and the "handle 1 T1"
> bet is off.
> 
> Quoting Chris Cappuccio (chris@nmedia.net):
> > David Norman [norny@yahoo.com] wrote:
> > Your Cisco 2500 can't handle more than 3Mbps of throughput.  That's two
hi,
     Agreed the CISC 2500 works well for say a single T1 carrying 
1 M on average. Add a shadow T1 now that would work since one is not 
working at the same time. However if simultaneous the below is what you get.
(as you go warp 12.. scotty says the ship can't take this any longer.)
Whereas a single T1 with a backup of say 2 channels of ISDN is workable.
It was not designed for say firewalling or extensive filtering ACLs.

Best Regards,
dreamwvr@dreamwvr.com

-- 
/*  Security is a work in progress - dreamwvr                 */
#                                                             
# Note: To begin Journey type man afterboot,man help,man hier[.]      
#                                                             
// "Who's Afraid of Schrodinger's Cat?" /var/(.)?mail/me \?  ;-]