On Thu, 4 Mar 2004, Robinson, Eric R. wrote:
> Opinions, please: Is NAT useless for a DMZ where all hosts have static
> (i.e., one-to-one) translations?
NAT and PAT are not inherently strong security measures, regardless of the
mappings. At best, it will function as a sort of security through
obscurity. The real purpose of {N,P}AT is to conserve IP address space
and/or translate for non-routable (e.g. RFC 1918) networks.
--
Todd's "Customer Disservice Hall of Shame" currently contains:
- Charter Communications: Mislead their customers about service
levels, block normal Internet connectivity, and exhibit excessive
downtime.
- AT&T: Honoring the "checks" they send out to entice you to switch
long-distance providers is apparently optional.
- eFax: Receive (not send) 20 pages of *unsolicited* faxes, and lose
your account.
_______________________________________________
RLUG mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.rlug.org/mailman/listinfo/rlug
