Point taken. Rather than reiterate my point I will refer to the following
excerpt from RFC 2993:
"
- NATs enable casual use of private addresses. These uncoordinated
addresses are subject to collisions when companies using these
addresses merge or want to directly interconnect using VPNs.
"
This is becoming a major drawback to NAT.
-Chris
-----Original Message-----
From: Matt Holdrege [mailto:matt(_at_)ipverse(_dot_)com]
Sent: Friday, December 15, 2000 10:19 AM
To: ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Subject: Re: NATs *ARE* evil!
Folks should read and *refer* to the NAT WG documents before commenting. An
awful lot of work was put into the content and wording of these documents.
RFC 2663
draft-ietf-nat-protocol-complications-06.txt
&
RFC 2993