On 11/4/05, Andrew Lewis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Dan Swartzendruber wrote: > > At 04:33 PM 11/1/2005, you wrote: > > > >> Count me in on SNAT/DNAT. It has been used for a long time and I for one > >> think it's very descriptive and logical. > > > > > > Seconded. > > How is that better than a circuit level gateway? I lean towards that > sort of thing since it reduces various headaches like MTU negotiation.
huh? what does this have to do with NAT? --Bill
