[ale] WRT54G2 wifi router troubles

[Michael Trausch]

On Thu, 2010-04-08 at 14:51 -0600, JK wrote:
> One very good reason to do this is to avoid having two layers of
> NAT between the internal net and the world.
> 
> Also, not all MCSEs are morons. Some are merely misinformed.
> Just sayin'. 

For most users who are going to have NAT on their network, this doesn't
make (much) of a difference.  It does introduce one more level of
translation, and therefore, adds some small amount of latency and
complexity, but most users do not do things that are going to be
disrupted by such things.  For example, HTTP, HTTPS, XMPP, SMTP, and
POP3 or IMAP---none of which are going to care terribly much if there is
a second NAT in the way.

Hopefully, we won't have to worry about NATs at all soon enough, and
we'll have consumer-level devices that use real firewalls (with a decent
UI on them).  After all, most end users only care about a few select
activities when it comes to a firewall---that is, "block all non-related
incoming packets," or "block all non-related incoming packets except
those to system X, ports Y1--Y2".

	--- Mike