It is what unique address are for, But it should be done with IPv6 unique addresses.
On Wed, 6 May 2020 at 17:23, Aled Morris <aled.w.mor...@googlemail.com> wrote: > On Wed, 6 May 2020 at 17:00, Paul Bone <paul@pmb.technology> wrote: > >> > Those sound like features, and how the Internet was supposed to work. >> >> Yes - was is the key word here, well with regards to IPv4. NAT has worked >> absolutely fine for the vast majority of outbound service requirements for >> a long time >> > > For certain very low values of "absolutely fine". The damage to the > growth and development of new services however, and the negative impact on > security and protocols, not so good. Think of all the time and effort has > been wasted by engineers dealing with NAT issues. That effort isn't free. > > > >> and a University does not need a /16 >> > > Who says? > > Nothing wrong with Royal Hollowing College allocating an IPv4 address from > their 134.219.0.0/16 to a printer or some other "lowly" device; for one > thing it makes it a lot easier when they merge with Bedford College and > don't have to renumber anything. It's what unique addresses are for. > > Aled > > -- Paul Bone Network Consultant PMB Technology
