Re: [9fans] nat

[erik quanstrom <quanstro@quanstro.net>]

>> i've got a lot of folk in the house who run whatever.
>> i'd really like to decommission the non-plan 9 machine.
>> the one thing i need from it is nat.  (and i don't want
>> to be stuck fiddling more stuff on the dsl appliance.)
>> doing nat just isn't that hard.  i just need to find the time.
>> this is about a summer-of-code sized project.  i don't think
>> it would require anything from the kernel.
>
> I beg to differ.  NAT adds complications to the already complex IP.
> Adding NAT to the Plan 9 IP stack can only make it more fragile, why
> not leave the job to the appliances that have been designed and
> constructed to deal with the problem and have been subject to very
> broad testing?

perhaps you forgot to read the part where i said
i don't think this would require anything from the
kernel; the ip would not need modification.

- erik