[91267] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Net Neutrality Legislative Proposal
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Florian Weimer)
Tue Jul 11 13:39:52 2006
From: Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de>
To: "Fergie" <fergdawg@netzero.net>
Cc: seth.johnson@RealMeasures.dyndns.org, nanog@nanog.org
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2006 18:34:55 +0200
In-Reply-To: <20060711.002917.26645.393103@webmail39.lax.untd.com> (Fergie's
message of "Tue, 11 Jul 2006 07:28:40 GMT")
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
* Fergie:
> I disagree with your statement on NAT end-points not being "publicly
> accessible" -- that's certainly not true, and a myth that needs to be
> finally killed.
From a security point of view, they are still accessible. From an
operational point of view, they are not, at least not on the original
IP layer, and if you aren't using 1:1 NAT.
Nevertheless, I think that the "publicly accessible" criterion is
flawed because it is too murky. But something similar is necessary to
implement the corporate networks exception.
