Re: NATs *ARE* evil!

How does the idea of NAT destroy the global Internet address space?


because in a NATted network the same addresses are used in different
parts of the network.  addresses are meaningless.


So what? Why is this the big problem?


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Photos - 35mm Quality Prints, Now Get 15 Free!
http://photos.yahoo.com/

<Prev in Thread]	Current Thread	[Next in Thread>
*Re: NATs ARE* evil!*, (continued)* *Re: NATs ARE* evil!*, Theodore Y. Ts'o* Message not available *Re: NATs ARE* evil!*, V Guruprasad* Message not available *Re: NATs ARE* evil!*, V Guruprasad* *Re: NATs ARE* evil!*, Bill Sommerfeld* Re: naming, RJ Atkinson *Re: NATs ARE* evil!*, Matt Crawford* *RE: NATs ARE* evil!*, Chris Millikin* *RE: NATs ARE* evil!*, David Higginbotham* *Re: NATs ARE* evil!*, J. Noel Chiappa* *RE: NATs ARE* evil!*, Chris Millikin* *Re: NATs ARE* evil!*, Kevin Farley* <= *Re: NATs ARE* evil!*, Scott Bradner* *Re: NATs ARE* evil!*, Paul Ferguson* *Re: NATs ARE* evil!*, Keith Moore* *Re: NATs ARE* evil!*, Michael Richardson* *Re: NATs ARE* evil!*, Keith Moore* *Re: NATs ARE* evil!*, J. Noel Chiappa* *Re: NATs ARE* evil!*, Perry E. Metzger* *Re: NATs ARE* evil!*, Sean Doran* *Re: NATs ARE* evil!*, Keith Moore* *Re: NATs ARE* evil!*, Perry E. Metzger*

Previous by Date:	*Re: Nimrod is still ugly - was: NATs ARE* evil!*, J. Noel Chiappa*
Next by Date:	Re: Congestion control, Fred Baker
Previous by Thread:	*RE: NATs ARE* evil!*, Chris Millikin*
Next by Thread:	*Re: NATs ARE* evil!*, Scott Bradner*
Indexes:	[Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]