Keith Moore wrote:
The only argument I've ventured is that there ARE legitimate usage cases
for NAT (both the flavor being described in this document and a statefull
NAT similar to what exists in IPv4 today).
you're grossly exaggerating those use cases. security is NOT a legitimate
use case for NAT. security is NOT enhanced by imposing mechanisms that make
network policy enforcement less flexible.
Keith,
Such extreme statement do need to be backed-up with evidence to be taken
seriously. Your opinion condradicts 99% of current practices including
sites with no other use for NAT than security.
So please do backup your statements with a list, preferably a long one,
of real world examples of large sites that are getting on without NAT.
Roger Marquis
_______________________________________________
nat66 mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nat66
