Re: The Devil's in the Deployment RE: NATs as firewalls

[Brian E Carpenter <brc at zurich.ibm.com>]

Noel,

On 2007-03-04 22:36, Noel Chiappa wrote:
>     > From: Brian E Carpenter <brc at zurich.ibm.com>
>
>     > the problems that NAT causes, and that having suffcient address space
>     > (a.k.a. IPv6) solves
>
> This comment seems to posit that insufficient address space is the only thing
> driving deployment of NATs (other than the modestly effective firewalls that
> NAT provides), and that's just not correct.

No, that wasn't my intention. It's more narrowly argued: the *problems* that
NAT causes are solved by having enough address space; the claimed security
features are actually firewall features. But that leaves a third piece: the
use of NAT to help with the multihoming and renumbering conundrum. However,
that I think belongs over on the RAM list.

    Brian

> Until the IETF fully understands and appreciates the forces which are driving
> the deployment of NAT boxes - which have been spectacularly successful in the
> marketplace, far more so than the purported official alternative - they will
> continue to eclipse said purported official alternative.
>
>         Noel
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf mailing list
> Ietf at ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf