Where NAT disenfranchises the end-user ...

Fri Sep 7 18:52:30 UTC 2001

On Fri, Sep 07, 2001 at 02:02:57PM -0400, Valdis.Kletnieks at vt.edu pontificated:
> That's like saying "You're only allowed to direct-dial your phone if
> you know how many volts are between the red and green wires, and what
> it's there for - everybody else has to ask the operator for assistance".
> 
> Cross out "operator" and put in "NAT", and that's your proposal.....

fortunately, we don't need a hyoomun to translate every packet - if we had
s/operator/automated non-human directory assistance/ I'd go along with your
allegory. :)

> -- 
> 				Valdis Kletnieks
> 				Operating Systems Analyst
> 				Virginia Tech

-- 
Scott Francis                   darkuncle@ [home:] d a r k u n c l e . n e t
Systems/Network Manager          sfrancis@ [work:]         t o n o s . c o m
UNIX | IP networks | security | sysadmin | caffeine | BOFH | general geekery
GPG public key 0xCB33CCA7              illum oportet crescere me autem minui
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 872 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20010907/d1c613c6/attachment.sig>