Where NAT disenfranchises the end-user ...
woody weaver
woody at callisma.com
Sun Sep 9 18:30:26 UTC 2001
I'm not sure who was first, in terms of IOS NAT and ip_masq. If memory
serves (and it usually doesn't) then 11.2 was released around Aug 97. I
don't see any easy way to identify the release date.
However, I think the linux code is older, although of course its largely
based upon the BSD firewall code.
The online source log shows
38 * Masquerading functionality
39 *
40 * Copyright (c) 1994 Pauline Middelink
41 *
42 * The pieces which added masquerading functionality are totally
43 * my responsibility and have nothing to with the original authors
44 * copyright or doing.
45 *
46 * Parts distributed under GPL.
47 *
48 * Fixes:
49 * Pauline Middelink : Added masquerading.
50 * Alan Cox : Fixed an error in the merge.
51 * Thomas Quinot : Fixed port spoofing.
52 * Alan Cox : Cleaned up retransmits in
spoofing.
53 * Alan Cox : Cleaned up length setting.
54 * Wouter Gadeyne : Fixed masquerading support of
ftp PORT commands
55 *
56 * Juan Jose Ciarlante : Masquerading code moved to
ip_masq.c
But Cisco was promoting NAT much earlier. They bought the old NTI hardware
(now called the PIX), and its primary purpose in life was NAT -- the company
was called Network Translations Inc. Looks like my first PIX install was 3
July 1996, so that predates IOS installations, I think.
--woody
On Sunday, September 09, 2001 6:22 AM, Circusnuts wrote:
>
> Yep- NAT showed up in Cisco IOS in the 11.2 version. I am
[..]
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Adam McKenna" <adam-nanog at flounder.net>
> Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 3:31 AM
> Subject: Re: Where NAT disenfranchises the end-user ...
>
> > On Thu, Sep 06, 2001 at 10:29:21PM -0700, Roeland Meyer wrote:
> > >
> > > ip_masq started out as a cheap way to cheat ISPs that
> wouldn't allocate
> IP
> > > addrs to dial-up users (home users have no need for a
> LAN?), or wanted
> to
> > > charge an arm'n'leg for every IP addr. This irked the
> Linux community
> > > sufficiently that they wrote a "cure". Unfortunately, the
> popularity of
> the
> > > "cure" superceded the need.
> >
> > Erm, sorry, but NAT was alive and well on Cisco routers
> long before it was
> in
> > the Linux kernel.
More information about the NANOG
mailing list