[rrg] Folks might be interested in these comments [dave at farber.net:[IP] the undead urban myth of the LOC/EID split]

[Darrel Lewis (darlewis)]

> > Begin forwarded message:
> >
> > From: mo at ccr.org (Mike O'Dell)
> > Date: October 29, 2008 8:28:25 PM EDT
> > To: dave at farber.net
> > Subject: the undead urban myth of the LOC/EID split
> >
> >
> > Dave,
> >
> > an indulgence if you would.
<snip>
> > It contains more than a few deeply profound insights.
> > Among other things, you'll discover why "global addresses" are an 
> > abberation, and that "NAT" is an absolutely natural 
> technique to use 
> > in structure networks - it's just the introduction of an arbitrary 
> > abstraction encapusulation. In fact, the ugliness of "NAT" 
> is directly 
> > related to how, uh, "unfortunate" the underlying 
> architecture really 
> > is.
> >

NAT and Encap are the two ways to skin this cat.  I can tell you from
having worked in the security field that the loss of information of the
originating source is a problem that is a non-obvious and oft-overlooked
weakness in the NAT technique.



-Darrel