RE: Free NAT for NT?

[dwelch () phoneboy com]

On Wed, 08 September 1999, "LeGrow, Matt" wrote:

> Personally the first time I brought my house LAN onto the internet
> securely and in less than five minutes with a spare 486 and Linux IP
> Masquerading I was thanking the gods for NAT, and wondering why NT
> didn't have the same.

This is probably my best argument *for* NAT. Does each one of your systems need it's own IP address on the Internet? 
Does each one of your systems in a company need it's own IP address? Generally not. 

I think everyone designing protocols should get over the idea that embedding an IP address inside the packet somewhere 
is necessary. NAT breaks just about anything that is based on this assumption. 

-- PhoneBoy

--
Dameon D. Welch, a.k.a. PhoneBoy (dwelch () phoneboy com)
Check Point FireWall-1 FAQs at http://www.phoneboy.com/fw1/
The views expressed herein are not necessarily those of anyone else.
--
Signup for your free USWEST.mail Email account http://www.uswestmail.net