----- Original Message -----
From: "Owen DeLong" <owen@delong.com> The point I'm trying to get across to you is that your security does NOT come from NAT. It comes from the stateful inspection mechanism and the policies you set within that stateful inspection mechanism. The unfortunate problem is that an entire generation of engineers has grown up not knowing the difference between stateful inspection and NAT because hardly any products contained stateful inspection without NAT and stateful inspection with address translation is a mouthful and NAT is a syllable.
The point you *appear* to be trying to make is that *NO* security comes from NAT, and that is not a defensible argument. If that's not what you mean to say, you might want to reexamine your phrasing. :-) Cheers, -- jra