← Back to context

Comment by hdgvhicv

5 days ago

Anti nat advocates seem to fall into the “the network shouldnt provide a stateful firewall” camp, because once you have a stateful firewall then nat is a trivial amount of extra bytes and very few issues with modern protocols (ones which don’t embed layer 3 addressing in layer 6/7 messages)

>Anti nat advocates seem to fall into the “the network shouldnt provide a stateful firewall” camp

Eh, what?

My entire justification for getting rid of NAT is *because* a default-deny-inbound firewall policy should exist, and NAT is a network patch that functions as a hacky firewall at the consumer level.