On Mar 28, 2006, at 5:50 AM, Dave Cridland wrote:
On Tue Mar 28 11:33:27 2006, Austin Schutz wrote:
The limitations of NAT you mention make little difference to most
of the NAT users I am familiar with. These are typically end users or
small organizations. They generally don't know what they are
missing, and NAT
works adequately well for their purposes.
Ah, but there's more. NAT is sold as a firewalling solution, not as
a cheap hack to share a single-user DSL.
NAT may be sold as a firewalling solution, but that doesn't make it so.
Regards
Marshall
The financial penalty from using non-natted ipv4 space is less of
an issue to larger organizations.
The first time I saw NAT outside of the hacker-at-home was in a
reasonably sized ISP, about ten years ago. Since NAT is sold as a
foolproof plug-and-play firewall - the lack of global
addressability is promoted as an advantage - then larger
organizations do use it.
Dave.
--
You see things; and you say "Why?"
But I dream things that never were; and I say "Why not?"
- George Bernard Shaw
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf