>> From: Keith Moore [mailto:moore(_at_)cs(_dot_)utk(_dot_)edu]
>> the problems with NAT are not generally due to implementation. they
>> are inherent in the very idea of NAT, which destroys the global
>> Internet address space.
> From: Dave Robinson <drobinson(_at_)endtoend(_dot_)com>
> How does the idea of NAT destroy the global Internet address space?
Ah, Keith was using a little verbal shorthand here. He meant "NAT removes the
global *uniqueness* of NAT'd Internet addresses". Similarly, when he said:
> addresses are meaningless.
he really meant "NAT'd addresses are no longer capable of uniquely globally
identifying people". NAT'd addresses do still have *some* meaning, of course,
it's just a more complex and restricted meaning than they used to.
<This message brought to you by the Society for More Accurate Technical
Terminology. :->
Noel