Apologies if this message is brief, it is sent from my cellphone.
Begin forwarded message:
From: Nathan Ward
On 5/02/2009, at 16:58, Chris Adams <cmad...@hiwaay.net> wrote:
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".
Not entirely. There was a lengthy and heated debate on this list
about 6 months ago, where the point was raised that many people like
to use NAT because it provides some level of anonymity in thier
network. Obviously this only applies for networks with enough people
that that has an effect.
IPv6 has privacy addresses to address this concern.
