we are starting to waste packets arguing over some private intellectual property
On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 3:24 PM, Christopher Morrow <morrowc.li...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 7:56 AM, Owen DeLong <o...@delong.com> wrote: > > For example, let’s say you have 20 machines for whom you want to allow > inbound SSH access. In the IPv4 world, with NAT, you have to configure an > individual port mapping for each machine and you have to either configure > all of the SSH clients, or, specify the particular port for the machine you > want to get to on the command line. > > in the original case in question the fact that there's nat happeng > isn't material... so all of this discussion of NAT is a red herring, > right? the user of AWS services cares not that 'nat is happening', > because they can simply RESTful up a VM instance and ssh into it in > ~30 seconds, no config required. > > let's skip all NAT discussions on this topic from here on out, yes? >