Once upon a time, Roger Marquis <marq...@roble.com> said: > * NAT advantage #5: it does not require replacement security measures to > protect against netscans, portscans, broadcasts (particularly microsoft > netbios), and other malicious inbound traffic.
Since NAT == stateful firewall with packet mangling, it would be much easier to drop the packet mangling and just use a stateful firewall. You are just reinforcing the incorrect belief that "NAT == security, no-NAT == no-security". -- Chris Adams <cmad...@hiwaay.net> Systems and Network Administrator - HiWAAY Internet Services I don't speak for anybody but myself - that's enough trouble.
