On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 1:28 PM, Lee Howard <l...@asgard.org> wrote: > Years ago, I asked, "Why are we stuck with NAT?" I still ask that. I > believe that the reason we're stuck with it is that so many of us believe > we're stuck with it--we're resigned to failure, so we don't do anything > about it.
Hi Lee, We're stuck with NAT because -enterprise- network security folks universally accept NAT's efficacy as a lynchpin component in their system security architecture. They accept it because the reasoning in support of the proposition makes sense and they consider the fact of its efficacy to have been satisfactorily demonstrated in practice. You can chase any other reasons for using NAT to the ends of the Earth and you'll never achieve a network where NAT's use can be discontinued. Regards, Bill Herrin -- William D. Herrin ................ her...@dirtside.com b...@herrin.us 3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/> Falls Church, VA 22042-3004
