Home page logo
/

nanog logo nanog mailing list archives

RE: Where NAT disenfranchises the end-user ...
From: Roeland Meyer <rmeyer () mhsc com>
Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2001 18:18:52 -0700


|> From: David Howe [mailto:DaveHowe () gmx co uk]
|> Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2001 5:54 PM
|> 
|> > Or more completely, they expect the network to be
|> > transparent so that every port at the destination IP
|> > address connects to the same machine, and there
|> > is no operational restriction on which end initiates
|> > the communication.

Absolutely true. I'll take that clarification.

|> which of course *is* possible for at least one machine per visible IP
|> address - even if additional IPs are masqed behind it.

if you are doing one:one NAT then why do NAT at all?
if you are doing one:many then it won't work (broken).


  By Date           By Thread  

Current thread:
[ Nmap | Sec Tools | Mailing Lists | Site News | About/Contact | Advertising | Privacy ]