Subject: Re: (NAT) requested terminology changes to

From: [email-masked] (Michael P DiGioia)
Date: Fri, 28 May 1999 14:42:17 -0400

Brian,

>> > Daniel Senie wrote:
>> > ...
>> > > Brian, I object to the definition of a "router" as a thing which runs a
>> > > routing update protocol. To suggest that is to suggest that any device
>> > > set up with static routes is not a router. This is simply contrary to a
>> > > great deal of historical use of the term "router."
>> >
>> > Daniel, you're correct of course; a router may have static routing
>> > tables instead of running a routing protocol. It doesn't change
>> > the point I was trying to make about routing being a completely
>> > distinct function from address translation, even if they occur in the
>> > same box.
>> >
>> Brian - A NAT device does routing. It forwards packets from one
>> interface (belonging to one realm) to another interface
>> (belonging to a different realm). Address translation is done prior
>> to forwarding to ensure packet routability within each realm.

Well I have to agree that any device that supports NAT functionality, routes
packets. Routing protocols for IP are all similar and also differ. NAT is not
considered a routing protocol, however, within its address (or routing) domain,
it has full control over the IP addressing within all the packets. 
However, once modifications are made by NAT, the normal routing
protocol processing needs to take place to transport packets (except for
tunnelling).

Because of the many similarities between what needs to be implemented for
any one routing protocol and any one NAT device, many of the people that
participate on this list have good working backgrounds in routers and
routing protocols as well. 

/mpd

-
To unsubscribe, email [email-masked]' with
'unsubscribe nat' in the body of the message.

---

From: Andy Heffernan <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 28 May 1999 13:30:29 -0700

Michael P Digioia writes:
> packets.

That depends entirely on how you define the verb "route".

An address translator only has to receive a packet, change address
information in it, and send it out again.  This does not necessarily
entail IP routing, or IP forwarding even.

[...]
> routing protocols as well. 

I have to admit that I don't see the similarities between a routing
protocol implementation and a NAT implementation.
-
To unsubscribe, email [email-masked]' with
'unsubscribe nat' in the body of the message.

---

From: Matt Holdrege <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 28 May 1999 13:40:56 -0700

To attempt to clarify this discussion a bit, what we are primarily trying
to define is the terminology for the NAT *function*. A function is not a
physical device. Routing is a function. Routing updates are functions.
Translating an IP header from one address realm to another is a function.

If we can keep this discussion at the functional level, we may get better
agreement. I think this is very important. As long as the products of this
working group deal with functions, we will not limit creative engineering
of NAT into products.

Matt Holdrege		http://www.ascend.com	[email-masked]
-
To unsubscribe, email [email-masked]' with
'unsubscribe nat' in the body of the message.