RE: arguments against NAT?

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

 



Armando,

>> Michel Py wrote:
>> I'm not arguing about that, it is delaying things indeed.
>> However I wonder which kind of instant messaging you are
>> referring to, as all the ones I've seen work fine through NAT.

> Armando L. Caro Jr.
> Yahoo and AOL (I have never used MSN). Sure, you can do
> normal chatting, but once you extend into the other
> features such as file transfer, voice, and webcam...
> things break.

In many enterprise environments, this would be a feature not a bug.
There are some webcams that are definitely inappropriate in a business
setup; given the lack of good enterprise content filtering solutions for
IM, if NAT does break IM webcams I don't have a problem with it. As of
file transfer, it does not bother me either as like a lot of other
network administrators I have a problem with users sharing their office
computer files with anyone unknown on the net. For voice there's always
that thing called the telephone that has the advantage to work all the
time with anybody and can be logged.

Michel.




[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]