From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ramin Alidousti Subject: Re: Completely NAT an ISP: A practical possibility? Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2002 18:50:58 -0400 Sender: netfilter-admin@lists.samba.org Message-ID: <20020618225058.GC27054@cannon.eng.us.uu.net> References: <3D0BBC45.5000807@palaver.net> <200206152233.g5FMXPA27757@Networker.rockstone.co.uk> <20020616001745.N2090@funkyjesus.org> <20020618171543.919DF681A5@engenho.terra.com.br> <20020618185005.GC26150@cannon.eng.us.uu.net> <20020618202115.32CD7C94DF@srv11-sao.terra.com.br> Mime-Version: 1.0 Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20020618202115.32CD7C94DF@srv11-sao.terra.com.br> Errors-To: netfilter-admin@lists.samba.org List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Rodrigo Senra Cc: netfilter@lists.samba.org On Tue, Jun 18, 2002 at 05:22:03PM -0300, Rodrigo Senra wrote: > > This would break lots of protocols. How would the clients put up with > > this broken functionality? > > Good observation. Yes it breaks some (all not NAT-able), and when this is used > clients have to live up with the limitations. But as I said, for the time being > this is used to accomodate a multiple-ISP cenario where clients need basically > HTTP, FTP, and less percentage of H.323. Just a small note. FTP is one of the protocols that would break... Ramin > > Take notice that NAT takes place before the packets reach their service providers. > So maybe, I couldn't call it properly "NAT an ISP" as the title suggests. > > > Or maybe they tunnel on top of this IP network > > Not that I know of. > Thank you for your observations. > > regards, > Senra > -- > Rodrigo Senra > MSc Computer Engineer (GPr Sistemas Ltda) rodsenra@gpr.com.br > http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~921234 (LinUxer 217.243) (ICQ 114477550)