Re: Penetrating a NAT

[Michael T. Babcock]

> Now, if you want to add another posit/given/assumption/whatever that the
> NAT *implementation* also groks multi-connection protocols like FTP,
> then you've essentially created a stateful packet filter.  If you add
> this posit, his and your statements become equivalent, and I agree with
> you that you get the same effect as a "dumb stateful packet filter". 
> But that's going very far afield to *define* all that as NAT, and I
> would then disagree with you on that semantic point...

Are you aware of, and how would you classify Linux's masquerading code?

-
[To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
"unsubscribe firewalls" in the body of the message.]