Re: arguments against NAT?

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

 



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Keith Moore wrote:
|>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
|
|
| How nice for you to be able to determine what everyone else should be able
| to run on their networks.
|

Yeah. The level of clueloss boggles the mind.

	MVH leifj
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQE/zlIj8Jx8FtbMZncRAuK0AKC9pb1scpTssHJtSbWuwM/AV/zCugCeIK6N
9XAfBN0fpbRH8AZGIiSs4/A=
=Rutg
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



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