Re: Ok; let's have the "Does DNAT contribute to Security" argument one more time...

[Jeff Kell <jeff-kell () utc edu>]

On 11/14/2011 4:21 PM, Rubens Kuhl wrote:
> For the common good it doesn't matter if the "NAT is good" guys are
> right or the "NAT is useless" guys are right, as they both fail to
> decrease the numbers of their opposing parts. We must get IPv6 done
> for both of them.

Hehehe...  depending on your ISPs / transit providers / border
technology level, putting critical infrastructure on IPv6[only] might be
the safest most unreachable network of all :)

Jeff