nanog mailing list archives
RE: Where NAT disenfranchises the end-user ...
From: Roeland Meyer <rmeyer () mhsc com>
Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2001 21:55:16 -0700
|> From: Charles Sprickman [mailto:spork () inch com] |> Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2001 9:16 PM |> On Thu, 6 Sep 2001, Roeland Meyer wrote: |> > To be honest, even though I've used NAT myself and have |> implemented NAT for |> > friends and clients, I would NEVER represent that a NAT'd |> address has the |> > full connectivity to the Internet that a static address does. |> |> True... neither does a well-firewalled LAN. There is a substantial difference between broken access and controlled access.
Current thread:
- RE: Where NAT disenfranchises the end-user ..., (continued)
- RE: Where NAT disenfranchises the end-user ... Jim Shankland (Sep 06)
- Re: Where NAT disenfranchises the end-user ... Eric A. Hall (Sep 06)
- RE: Where NAT disenfranchises the end-user ... Mike Batchelor (Sep 07)
- RE: Where NAT disenfranchises the end-user ... Brian Whalen (Sep 09)
- Re: Where NAT disenfranchises the end-user ... Christian Kuhtz (Sep 09)
- Re: Where NAT disenfranchises the end-user ... Josh Richards (Sep 06)
- Re: Where NAT disenfranchises the end-user ... Jeff Mcadams (Sep 06)
- Re: Where NAT disenfranchises the end-user ... David Howe (Sep 07)
- RE: Where NAT disenfranchises the end-user ... Charles Sprickman (Sep 07)
- Re: Where NAT disenfranchises the end-user ... bmanning (Sep 07)
- Re: Where NAT disenfranchises the end-user ... Jon Mansey (Sep 07)
- Re: Where NAT disenfranchises the end-user ... bmanning (Sep 07)
- Re: Where NAT disenfranchises the end-user ... Valdis . Kletnieks (Sep 07)
- Re: Where NAT disenfranchises the end-user ... Scott Francis (Sep 07)