[134585] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Problems with removing NAT from a network
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jared Mauch)
Fri Jan 7 12:32:14 2011
From: Jared Mauch <jared@puck.nether.net>
In-Reply-To: <9F539E44-3012-41ED-8018-78973EA88632@arbor.net>
Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2011 12:31:12 -0500
To: "Dobbins, Roland" <rdobbins@arbor.net>
Cc: Nanog Operators' Group <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Jan 7, 2011, at 5:44 AM, Dobbins, Roland wrote:
>=20
> On Jan 7, 2011, at 4:02 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
>=20
>> No, it hasn't always been a Bad Idea.=20
>=20
> Yes, it has. There're lots of issues with embedding IP addresses =
directly into apps and so forth which have nothing to do with NAT.
Let me know when the products from Arbor no longer require this.
Thanks.
- Jared=
