Subject: Re: interception proxies

From: Vernon Schryver <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2000 08:43:36 -0600 (MDT)

> From: Joe Touch <[email-masked]>

> ...
> The only question is whether there is something similar between NATs and
> transparent proxies. Maybe "modifying IP packets considered harmful".
> The issue with NATs may best be added under "even within the same AD,
> transparent proxies are dangerous because..." including the IP ID and
> TCP port and sequence number issues there seems on-topic. (?)

Agreed, NAT's and redirecting proxies are technically similar. 

(However, I'm not sure that 'a "transparent proxy" is a proxy that does
not modify the request or response beyond what is required for proxy
authentication and identification' is similar to a NAT box or a redirecting
proxy.)

Is there an RFC that includes the many complaints that have been made about
NAT boxes in the main IETF list?

vjs

---

From: Henrik Nordstrom <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2000 21:25:07 +0200

> Agreed, NAT's and redirecting proxies are technically similar.

With the significant distinction that NAT is performed on all traffic,
while transparent proxies are only done on some.

--
Henrik Nordstrom

---

From: Joe Touch <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2000 13:53:03 -0700

> while transparent proxies are only done on some.

NATs can do redirection based on any subsets of IP or TCP/UDP headers,
just like redirecting proxies.