Also suggests the implementation is not exactly consistent (or as simple as intended)... NAT seems completely superfluous when the networks are dished out as /64. Well, the practicallity of NAT is that it allows you to bridge other networks to the internet, which themselves ain't part of it.
If you connect a network to the Internet it is part of it. NAT doesn't change that.
This might be interesting if you want to hide your own network structure,
Which NAT does not do. NAT is *not* a security measure; or at least not an effective one.
especially if you may only use your uplink for one computer
Which should only be an issue for the IPv4 world.
or if your own network is a playground and you don't want to interfere with the rest, but maybe need some limited connectivity to it.
That is the purpose of a firewall.
Still I personally think a firewall should do for that and personally I am looking forward to IPv6 because I will rid me of all the NAT hassle.
Yes! -- OpenGroupware developer: awilliam@whitemice.org http://whitemiceconsulting.blogspot.com/ OpenGroupare & Cyrus IMAPd documenation @ http://docs.opengroupware.org/Members/whitemice/wmogag/file_view -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org