[159722] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Slashdot: UK ISP PlusNet Testing Carrier-Grade NAT Instead of IPv6
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (William Herrin)
Fri Jan 18 16:48:47 2013
In-Reply-To: <CD1EF84A.8C7E%Lee@asgard.org>
From: William Herrin <bill@herrin.us>
Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2013 16:46:11 -0500
To: Lee Howard <Lee@asgard.org>
Cc: North American Network Operators' Group <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 1:28 PM, Lee Howard <Lee@asgard.org> wrote:
> Years ago, I asked, "Why are we stuck with NAT?" I still ask that. I
> believe that the reason we're stuck with it is that so many of us believe
> we're stuck with it--we're resigned to failure, so we don't do anything
> about it.
Hi Lee,
We're stuck with NAT because -enterprise- network security folks
universally accept NAT's efficacy as a lynchpin component in their
system security architecture. They accept it because the reasoning in
support of the proposition makes sense and they consider the fact of
its efficacy to have been satisfactorily demonstrated in practice.
You can chase any other reasons for using NAT to the ends of the Earth
and you'll never achieve a network where NAT's use can be
discontinued.
Regards,
Bill Herrin
--
William D. Herrin ................ herrin@dirtside.com bill@herrin.us
3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/>
Falls Church, VA 22042-3004
