Roger,
On 2010-10-28 17:29, Roger Marquis wrote:
...
> Home and business users require NAT for 1) layer abstraction (no
> different, fundamentally, from the abstraction of Ethernet's MAC layer),
> 2) flexibility (unlinking internal from external and multi-homed
> topologies), and 3) security.
For home users and the vast majority of business users, these three
arguments are well known to be spurious. I won't waste bits on that.
On the other hand, who's willing to refund me the $500NZ that I
unintentionally donated to a charity earlier this year, because
a NAT session timeout aborted a "secure" connection before the
ack for the credit card transaction came back over HTTPS, allegedly
a protocol that NATs handle impeccably?
OK, it was my own stupid fault for repeating the transaction before
checking my credit card account, and it was for a good cause,
but this is the basic reason why NATs are a bad thing for homes
and businesses. They break stuff.
Brian
_______________________________________________
nat66 mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nat66
