Setting up Cisco VPN with NAT to remote network

So I'm trying to setup a Cisco ASA 5505 for VPN to a remote network and I need to NAT my internal IP address based on their requirements.

Here are their instructions:

Their hosts:
192.168.50.83 (Surescripts Host Server)
192.168.50.85 (RxHub Host Server)
192.168.50.86 (Surescripts Host Server)
192.168.50.50 (Patient Portal Host Server)

Remote Peer IP: 66.179.80.108
Remote Network: 192.168.50.0/24 (255.255.255.0)
Your Local Network: 10.x.x.45/32 (255.255.255.255)

Clinic will need to make ACL from 10.x.x.45/32 to remote network 192.168.50.0/24

Clinic will need to NAT interesting traffic to 10.x.x.45/32 (255.255.255.255)

I have a lot of experience with Linux IPtables and IPchains, Open source firewalls like M0n0wall (monowall) etc., but not sure how to do this with Cisco.

Will spend some time figuring this out...

Any help is immensely appreciated!

Wolfram | Alpha Search Engine

Watch out, there's a new search engine in town...

The search engine that will be going live in the next few weeks:

http://www.wolframalpha.com/index.html

Instead of you typing in words and it finds pages with those words, you type in something like "Population in Illinois" and instead of returning pages with that text, it actually calculates the predicted answer of your query and returns graphs/charts/comparisons.

Or you type in "Salary in LA compared to NY" and it will return the comparison with charts and everything...

If this actually works when it goes live, it could be way better than google is at the moment... But for now, google obviously pwns the market of delivering relevant pages on the web...

Is Apple's new OS "Leopard" really that big of a deal?

I only use Macs in my home. I won't allow my family to use PC's because I don't really want to spend all of my time working on that computer every couple months. I'd much rather set up a Mac and let my kids and family use that so I don't have to always be doing something with it so it will work.

I'm not really sure why die-hard PC users don't get that. Perhaps it's because they haven't had to support them enough in their own lives??? I'm not talking about support them as part of their work. Obviously the more the computers don't work, the more likely they have a job.

I'm talking more about setting up a computer for someone else to use. Once you do it (normally you end up doing it for free) you don't really want to have to take it back every few months because something isn't working properly. I especially like the ones that say something like, "Program 'X' isn't working any more because every time I do 'Y', 'Z' happens". In reality, most of the time the cause has nothing to do with program 'X' or either the behavior that is 'Y' and 'Z'.

Regardless of the problem, this is the absolutely infallible reality that will inevitably befall a Windows PC destined for use inside a home. And to Microsoft's credit, when this happens, many home users just go out and buy a new computer since the cost of 'fixing' the problem would cost more than just simply buying a new one at Costco.

So my Question really isn't about Microsoft or their operating system. I just wanted to pose the question as to whether or not Leopard is really that big of a deal? I like Tiger and all of the iterations that came before. I think the functionality of Leopard is pretty nice, too, but is Leopard a great big deal or just a small upgrade?

The funny thing about the question, however, is that even with the changes that Leopard provides the consumers, it's still better than the jump from XP to Vista. I'm not sure how long the development process for Leopard took, but I'm sure it's a lot less than the 5 plus years of Vista. And Vista isn't something I've really seen any where (except on display at Costco). I know some Vendors are having a bang up job just removing Vista installs on OEM PC's and installing XP SP2 instead.

I don't really blame Microsoft. For as much as I don't like their operating systems, XP is a decent product. At least before my family starts using it.

On the plane home, I had a thought...

I was riding on the plane back from New York and as I was trying to relax a bit, a thought popped into my head:

---

"Vista is a disaster."

---

I don't know why the thought came at that moment, nor had I been thinking very much at all about the operating system on my trip. However, when I got back to the office, I did a search on the phrase and found a couple articles. The best one was this:
http://www.news.com/8301-10784_3-9785337-7.html?



Microsoft is big enough that their failure with Vista won't make much of a difference to them, at least not in the short term. The question is whether or not it erodes a reputation that they've built over the last 15 years, which would affect things more as time goes by. The other hidden erosion would be the minds and hearts of the Microsoft employee base that put so much of their life into a worthless product.

Back in 2001 when I first saw OS X and started playing around with Linux, I predicted a very slow decline of the Microsoft franchise and unfortunately, I've been watching it happen ever since. One can't look at the opportunities presented by both the Open Source and Apple communities and ignore the superiority that each offering brings to the table.

The question is whether or not the behemoth that is Microsoft can react in time. Reaction at this point means looking at their business model and deciding that perhaps their old way of doing things no longer works. I think once they recognize this as a new and crucial perspective, they can then start to look at the next big opportunities available to them. If they don't realize this, they are in for a very slow and painful death. Unfortunately, in technology, it's usually the little guys that come up with the new directions for technology, not the behemoths. Microsoft is more like the buzzards of the world that try to take advantage of old opportunities. As technology moves faster and faster, there is little value in trying to capitalize on the remains of yesterday's excitement.

I have little faith that Microsoft will ever be able to regain the footing that it once had. For me, the thought that pops into my head is reminiscent of the old quarter arcade games: Game Over! And as it happened back then, the quarter you spent for a bit of entertainment didn't last very long.

Google Calendar

I've finally figured out where the notification options reside for each of your calendars. If you click on the "Manage Calendars" link on the left side of your main "Calendar" window, it will take you to a page where you can select "Notifications" for each of your calendars. From that spot, I've taken a screen shot that shows you how to setup default notifications for each of your calendars.

I wanted the ability to have notifications sent to all three different places, (SMS, Online Pop-up, Email) because I never know where I'll be at the time that I'll need the notification.

So far the SMS notifications have been working great. It's nice to have my own little pre-programmed 'devil in your ear' option for everything going on each day. Otherwise, with my lack of brainpower these days, I'm sure to forget most of what I need to do without it.

The Google Office Suite (Sweet!)

I've been reading and doing a lot more research on the Google Office suite (maybe I should call it, "Sweet"). ;)

There is a tremendous amount of flexibility and functionality within the Google suite. I'm just starting to look at the Calendar app, too, but one thing it does is send calendar notifications through SMS to cell phones 15 minutes before events - or whatever time-frame works for you and the appointment. Plus the calendar functionality is very similar to iCal (the mac calendaring app) which I like. Another thing is that you can create new events in your schedule like this, "Lunch with Doug Tomorrow at noon" and the app will automatically create an event the next day at noon with "Lunch with Doug" listed in the event header. You don't need to do anything else than that. I don't know any application that can facilitate that kind of 'smart' scheduling.

Plus in both Docs and Spreadsheet, there is the collaboration feature which allows sharing with multiple people all editing in real-time, with updates of the doc for all users about every 10 seconds. Virtually you see modifications instantly and automatically, i.e. you don't have to refresh, it happens on its own. Also, there is an IM client built into the docs and spreadsheet app (it's inline with the document and essentially shows up on the right side of the screen) that allows all people working on a document to be in on the same IM session while you're working on the doc. I don't know if my description really does it justice or if you really just need to see it in action. I'm including a screenshot of what this looks like.

I've been using it recently, and I really like having all my docs stored and available online for instant accessibility and modification if need be. Now I'm really wondering about how it would integrate with iPhone, and how useable the application will be on that device... For basic accessibility, I'm sure it will work pretty well, as the safari browser doesn't flinch with the google interface.

Anyway, in case you were doing some research on the Suite in trying to determine its effectiveness, it presents so pretty powerful options for small and medium enterprises.

I give it high marks, but the downsides are severe, but few:
1 - If you have no Internet connection the suite is worthless.
2 - The functionality of Docs and Spreadsheet do not rival the full product of other 'fat' office installs (a la "Open Office", or "Microsoft Office". However, in its defense, I would say the Google functionality covers 98% of the people who use those apps - Which makes me wonder what this spells for Microsoft??? They don't have a market for Office when 98% of their user base realizes they don't need it (The google suite will open word and excel docs just fine and will export to .doc and .xls just fine)

Anyway pretty cool stuff.