IPv6 - real vs theoretical problems

Sat Jan 8 01:54:07 UTC 2011

On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 8:02 PM, Dobbins, Roland <rdobbins at arbor.net> wrote:
> NAT has no inherent security benefits whatsoever.

Hi Roland,

With that statement, you paint with a remarkably broad brush. As you
know, folks use (or perhaps misuse) the term "NAT" to describe
everything from RFC 1631 to so-called "transparent proxies" which are
basically bastion hosts with some fancy behavior on the interior
interface. I presume you don't intend us to conclude that a bastion
host firewall provides no security benefit to the equipment it
protects. Would you care to clarify which of that range of
technologies you consider to serve no security function?

Regards,
Bill Herrin

-- 
William D. Herrin ................ herrin at dirtside.com  bill at herrin.us
3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/>
Falls Church, VA 22042-3004