Private address and static IP as an commercial offer.

| On Mon, Jun 18, 2001 at 12:48:28AM -0700, Randy Bush wrote:
| > > The policy is "tell people that NAT exists, explain to them what the
| > > benefits are
| >
| > what benefits are there?  and before you say "security" please go read
| > just about any mailing list archive.
|
| Ease of changing ISPs,

I have to change my DHCP server, won't take too long.
And if I had put in my sevrers there, with a static address it would be even
simpler.

>ease of internal network structuring (that is:
| "just use class Cs because that's the default netmask in Windoze"), *plus*

Since I am using DHCP I enter the netmask there, nowere else.

| security.

My main security concern is people sending confidential documents as email
attachments...

|Yes, there are drawbacks, and it's not the maximum security
| you can get, but as long as the router isn't broken, it's more secure
| than giving full access to every machine in your network.

Oh, that is 1 line of configuration "deny all"
which breaks excactly the same things as NAT.

|
| > the informal ietf position is that there are no advantages to nats, and
| > lots of disadvantages.
|
| Which is a known point of view :)

Maybe that point of view is there for a reason ?

-hph