A new sysadmin has recently joined the company where I work (I am a
software engineer and part-time sysadmin). As he's the only full-time
sysadmin here, the network now falls under his purview. Today he
showed me his plans for reorganisation of the network, and they involve
introducing NAT on a big scale. His main arguments in favour of NAT
are security (which I debunked), address shortage (which we don't have),
and administrative convenience (which he never explained enough for me
to see).
I've argued strongly against NAT, but he's one of those people who seem
to be willing to accept arbitrary amounts of pain ("we don't need to
use [protocols that put IP addresses in payload]", "timeouts aren't
a problem"). I'm now pointing him at some relevant RFCs. My question
for the list is is there a web page or other document anywhere that
comprehensively states the case against NAT?
-zefram