Private address and static IP as an commercial offer.
Hans Petter Holen hph at online.no
Mon Jun 18 14:12:42 CEST 2001
| On Mon, Jun 18, 2001 at 12:48:28AM -0700, Randy Bush wrote: | > > The policy is "tell people that NAT exists, explain to them what the | > > benefits are | > | > what benefits are there? and before you say "security" please go read | > just about any mailing list archive. | | Ease of changing ISPs, I have to change my DHCP server, won't take too long. And if I had put in my sevrers there, with a static address it would be even simpler. >ease of internal network structuring (that is: | "just use class Cs because that's the default netmask in Windoze"), *plus* Since I am using DHCP I enter the netmask there, nowere else. | security. My main security concern is people sending confidential documents as email attachments... |Yes, there are drawbacks, and it's not the maximum security | you can get, but as long as the router isn't broken, it's more secure | than giving full access to every machine in your network. Oh, that is 1 line of configuration "deny all" which breaks excactly the same things as NAT. | | > the informal ietf position is that there are no advantages to nats, and | > lots of disadvantages. | | Which is a known point of view :) Maybe that point of view is there for a reason ? -hph
[ lir-wg Archives ]