Re: Is NAT can provide some kind of protection?

[Owen DeLong <owen () delong com>]

On Jan 12, 2011, at 8:54 AM, Fernando Gont wrote:

> On 12/01/2011 01:17 p.m., George Bonser wrote:
>
> > But your security person needs to shift their thinking because the
> > purpose of NAT and private addressing is to conserve IP address, not to
> > provide security.  With IPv6, the concept of NAT goes away.  
>
> You have heard about NAT66, right?
Yes... Hopefully it was just a bad dream.

NATing IPv6 doesn't do anything good. There's no benefit, only cost.

Owen