NAT Working Group                                           P. Srisuresh
INTERNET-DRAFT                                       Lucent Technologies
Obsoletes: RFC 1631                                           K. Egevang
Category: BCP                                          Intel Corporation
Expire in six months                                        October 1998

         Traditional IP Network Address Translator (Traditional NAT)

Status of this Memo

   This document is an Internet-Draft.  Internet-Drafts are working
   documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), its
   areas, and its working groups.  Note that other groups may also
   distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts.

   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six
   months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other
   documents at any time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-
   Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as
   "work in progress."

   To view the entire list of current Internet-Drafts, please check
   the "1id-abstracts.txt" listing contained in the Internet-Drafts
   Shadow Directories on (Africa),
   (Northern Europe), (Southern Europe),
   (Pacific Rim), (US East Coast), or
   (US West Coast).


   The NAT operation described in this document extends address
   translation introduced in RFC 1631 and includes a new type
   of network address and TCP/UDP port translation.  In addition,
   this document corrects the Checksum adjustment algorithm
   published in RFC 1631 and attempts to discuss NAT operation
   and limitations in detail.


   Basic Network Address Translation or Basic NAT is a method by which
   IP addresses are mapped from one group to another, transparent to
   end users. Network Address Port Translation, or NAPT is a method by

Srisuresh & Egevang                                             [Page 1]

Internet Draft               Traditional NAT                October 1998

   which many network addresses and their TCP/UDP ports are translated
   into a single network address and its TCP/UDP ports.  Together,
   these two operations, referred to as traditional NAT, provide a
   mechanism to connect a routing realm with private addresses to the
   external routing network with globally unique registered addresses.

1. Introduction

   The need for IP Address translation arises when a network's internal
   IP addresses cannot be used outside the network either for privacy
   reasons or because they are invalid for use outside the network.

   Network topology outside a local domain can change in many ways.
   Customers may change providers, company backbones may be
   reorganized, or providers may merge or split.  Whenever external
   topology changes with time, address assignment for nodes within the
   local domain must also change to reflect the external changes.
   Changes of this type can be hidden from the users within the domain
   by centralizing changes to a single address translation router.

   Basic Address translation would allow hosts in a private network to
   transparently access the external network and enable access to
   selective local hosts from the outside. Organizations with a
   network setup predominantly for internal use, with a need for
   occasional external access are good candidates for this scheme.

   Many Small Office, Home Office (SOHO) users and telecommuting
   employees have multiple Network nodes in their office, running
   TCP/UDP applications, but have a single IP address assigned to
   their remote access router by their service provider to access
   remote networks. This ever increasing community of remote access
   users would be benefited by NAPT, which would permit multiple
   nodes in a local network to simultaneously access remote networks
   using the single IP address assigned to their router.

   There are limitations to using the translation method. It is
   mandatory that all requests and responses pertaining to a session
   be routed via the same NAT router. One way to ascertain this would
   be to have NAT based on a border router that is unique to a stub
   domain, where all IP packets are either originated from the domain
   or destined to the domain. There are other ways to ensure this
   with multiple NAT devices. For example, a private domain could have
   two distinct exit points to different providers and the session flow
   from the hosts in a private network could traverse through whichever
   NAT device has the best metric for an external host.

   Address translation is application independent and often accompanied

Srisuresh & Egevang                                             [Page 2]

Internet Draft               Traditional NAT                October 1998

   by application specific gateways (ALGs) to perform payload
   monitoring and alterations. FTP is the most popular ALG resident on
   NAT devices. Applications requiring ALG intervention must not have
   their payload encoded, as doing that would effectively disables the
   ALG, unless the ALG has the key to decrypt the the payload.

   This solution has the disadvantage of taking away the end-to-end
   significance of an IP address, and making up for it with increased
   state in the network. As a result, end-to-end IP network level
   security assured by IPSec cannot be assumed to end hosts, with a
   NAT device enroute. The advantage of this approach however is that
   it can be installed without changes to hosts or routers.

   The definition of terms used in this document may be found in "IP
   Network Address Translator Terminology and Considerations" [REF1].

2. Overview of traditional NAT

   The Address Translation operation presented in this document is
   referred to as "Traditional NAT". There are other variations of
   NAT that will not be explored in this document. Traditional NAT
   would allow hosts within a private network to transparently
   access hosts in the external network.  In a traditional NAT,
   sessions are uni-directional, outbound from the private network.
   Sessions in the opposite direction may be allowed on an
   exceptional basis using static address maps for pre-selected
   hosts. Basic NAT and NAPT are two variations of traditional NAT,
   in that translation is Basic NAT is limited to IP addresses alone,
   whereas translation in NAPT is extended to include IP address and
   Transport identifier (such as TCP/UDP port or ICMP query ID).

   Unless mentioned otherwise, Address Translation or NAT throughout
   this document will pertain to traditional NAT, namely Basic NAT
   as well as NAPT.  Only the stub border routers as described in
   figure 1 below may be configured to perform address translation.

        \ | /                 .                                /
   +---------------+  WAN     .           +-----------------+/
   |Regional Router|----------------------|Stub Router w/NAT|---
   +---------------+          .           +-----------------+\
                              .                      |         \
                              .                      |  LAN
                              .               ---------------
                        Stub border

            Figure 1: Traditional NAT Configuration

Srisuresh & Egevang                                             [Page 3]

Internet Draft               Traditional NAT                October 1998

2.1 Overview of Basic NAT

   Basic NAT operation is as follows. A stub domain with a set of
   private network addresses could be enabled to communicate with
   external network by dynamically mapping to a set of globally valid
   network addresses. If the number of local nodes are less than or
   equal to addresses in the global set, each local address is
   guaranteed a global address to map to. Otherwise, nodes allowed to
   have simultaneous access to external network are limited by the
   number of addresses in global set. Individual local addresses may
   be statically mapped to specific global addresses to ensure
   guaranteed access to the outside or to allow access to the local
   host from external hosts.  Multiple simultaneous sessions may be
   initiated from a local node, using the same address mapping.

   Addresses inside a stub domain are local to that domain and not
   valid outside the domain. Thus, addresses inside a stub domain
   can be reused by any other stub domain. For instance, a single
   Class A address could be used by many stub domains. At each exit
   point between a stub domain and backbone, NAT is installed. If
   there is more than one exit point it is of great importance that
   each NAT has the same translation table.

                                   \ | /
                                 |Regional Router|
                               WAN |           | WAN
                                   |           |
               Stub A .............|....   ....|............ Stub B
                                   |           |
                 {s=,^  |           |  v{s=,
                  d=}^  |           |  v d=}
                   +-----------------+       +-----------------+
                   |Stub Router w/NAT|       |Stub Router w/NAT|
                   +-----------------+       +-----------------+
                         |                         |
                         |  LAN               LAN  |
                   -------------             -------------
                             |                 |
           {s=, ^  |                 |  v{s=,
            d=}^ +--+             +--+ v d=}
                            |--|             |--|
                           /____\           /____\

                     Figure 2: Basic NAT Operation

Srisuresh & Egevang                                             [Page 4]

Internet Draft               Traditional NAT                October 1998

   For instance, in the example of figure 2, both stubs A and B
   internally use class A address Stub A's NAT is
   assigned the class C address, and Stub B's NAT is
   assigned the class C address The class C addresses
   are globally unique no other NAT boxes can use them.

   When stub A host wishes to send a packet to stub B host, it uses the globally unique address as
   destination, and sends the packet to it's primary router. The stub
   router has a static route for net so the packet is
   forwarded to the WAN-link. However, NAT translates the source
   address of the IP header to the globally unique before the packet is forwarded. Likewise, IP packets
   on the return path go through similar address translations.

   Notice that this requires no changes to hosts or routers. For
   instance, as far as the stub A host is concerned, is
   the address used by the host in stub B. The address translations
   are completely transparent. Of course, this is just a simple
   example. There are numerous issues to be explored.

2.2. Overview of NAPT

   Say, an organization has a private IP network and a WAN link to a
   service provider. The private network's stub router is assigned
   a globally valid address on the WAN link and the remaining nodes
   in the organization have IP addresses that have only local
   significance. In such a case, nodes on the private network could
   be allowed simultaneous access to external network, using the
   single registered IP address with the aid of NAPT. NAPT would
   allow mapping of tuples of the type (local IP addresses, local
   TU port number) to tuples of the type (registered IP address,
   assigned TU port number).

   This model fits the requirements of most Small Office Home Office
   (SOHO) groups to access external network using a single service
   provider assigned IP address. This model could be extended to
   allow inbound access by statically mapping a local node per each
   service TU port of the registered IP address.

   In the example of figure 3 below, stub A internally uses class A
   address The stub router's WAN interface is assigned an
   IP address by the service provider.

Srisuresh & Egevang                                             [Page 5]

Internet Draft               Traditional NAT                October 1998

                                   \ | /
                                 |Service Provider Router|
                               WAN |
               Stub A .............|....
       ^{s=,sport=1024, |  v{s=, sport = 23,
       ^ d=,dport=23}   |  v d=, dport = 1024}
                       |Stub Router w/NAPT|
                         |  LAN
      |        ^{s=,sport=3017, |  v{s=, sport=23,
      |        ^ d=,dport=23} |  v d=, dport=3017}
      |                                  |
     +--+      +--+                    +--+
     |--|      |--|                    |--|
    /____\    /____\                  /____\   .....

    Figure 3: Network Address Port Translation (NAPT) Operation

   When stub A host sends a telnet packet to host, it uses the globally unique address as
   destination, and sends the packet to it's primary router. The
   stub router has a static route for net so the packet
   is forwarded to the WAN-link. However, NAPT translates the tuple
   of source address and source TCP port 3017 in the IP
   and TCP headers into the globally unique and a
   uniquely assigned TCP port, say 1024, before the packet is
   forwarded. Packets on the return path go through similar address
   and TCP port translations for the target IP address and target
   TCP port. Once again, notice that this requires no changes to
   hosts or routers.  The translation is completely transparent.

   In this setup, only TCP/UDP sessions are allowed and must originate
   from the local network. However, there are services such as DNS
   that demand inbound access. There may be other services for which
   an organization wishes to allow inbound session access.  It is
   possible to statically configure a TU port service on the stub
   router to be directed to a specific node in the private network.

   In addition to TCP/UDP sessions, ICMP messages, with the exception

Srisuresh & Egevang                                             [Page 6]

Internet Draft               Traditional NAT                October 1998

   of REDIRECT message type may also be monitored by NAPT router.
   ICMP query type packets are translated similar to that of TCP/UDP
   packets, in that the identifier field in ICMP message header will
   be uniquely mapped to a query identifier of the registered IP
   address.  The identifier field in ICMP query messages is set by
   Query sender and returned unchanged in response message from the
   Query responder.  So, the tuple of (Local IP address, local ICMP
   query identifier) is mapped to a tuple of (registered IP address,
   assigned ICMP query Identifier) by the NAPT router to uniquely
   identify ICMP queries of all types from any of the local hosts.
   Modifications to ICMP error messages are discussed in a later
   section, as that involves modifications to ICMP payload as well
   as the IP and ICMP headers.

   In NAPT setup, where the registered IP address is the same as the IP
   address of the stub router WAN interface, the router has to be sure
   to make distinction between TCP, UDP or ICMP query sessions
   originated from itself versus those originated from the nodes on
   local network. All inbound sessions (including TCP, UDP and ICMP
   query sessions) are assumed to be directed to the NAT router as
   the end node, unless the target service port is statically mapped to
   a different node in the local network.

   Sessions other than TCP, UDP and ICMP query type are simply not
   permitted from local nodes, serviced by a NAPT router.

3.0. Translation phases of a session.

   The translation phases with traditional NAT are same as described in
   [REF1]. The following sub-sections identify items that are specific
   to traditional NAT.

3.1. Address binding:

   With Basic NAT, a private address is bound to an external address,
   when the first outgoing session is initiated from the private host.
   Subsequent to that, all other outgoing sessions originating
   from the same private address will use the same address binding for
   packet translation.

   In the case of NAPT, where many private addresses are mapped to a
   single globally unique address, the binding would be from the
   tuple of (private address, private TU port) to the tuple of
   (assigned address, assigned TU port). As with Basic NAT, this
   binding is determined when the first outgoing session is initiated
   by the tuple of (private address, private TU port) on the private
   host. While not a common practice, it is possible to have an

Srisuresh & Egevang                                             [Page 7]

Internet Draft               Traditional NAT                October 1998

   application on private host establish multiple simultaneous
   sessions originating from the same tuple of (private address,
   private TU port). In such a case, a single binding for the tuple
   of (private address, private TU port) may be used for translation
   of packets pertaining to all sessions originating from the same
   tuple on a host.

3.2. Address lookup and translation:

   After an address binding or (address, TU port) tuple binding in
   case of NAPT is established, a soft state may be maintained for
   each of the connections using the binding. Packets belonging to
   the same session will be subject to session lookup for translation
   purposes. The exact nature of translation is discussed in the
   follow-on section.

3.3. Address unbinding:

   When the last session based on an address or (address, TU port)
   tuple binding is terminated,  the binding itself may be terminated.

4.0. Packet Translations

   Packets pertaining to NAT managed sessions undergo translation
   in either direction. Individual packet translation issues  are
   covered in detail in the following sub-sections.

4.1. IP, TCP, UDP and ICMP Header Manipulations

   In Basic NAT model, the IP header of every packet must be
   modified. This modification includes IP address (source IP
   address for outbound packets and destination IP address for
   inbound packets) and the IP checksum.

   For TCP/UDP sessions, modifications must include update of
   checksum in the TCP/UDP headers. This is because TCP/UDP
   checksum also covers a pseudo header which contains the source
   and destination IP addresses. As an exception, UDP headers
   with 0 checksum should not be modified.  As for ICMP Query
   packets, no further changes in ICMP header are required as
   the checksum in ICMP header does not cover IP addresses.

   In NAPT model, modifications to IP header are similar to that of
   Basic NAT. For TCP/UDP sessions, modifications must be extended
   to include translation of TU port (source TU port for outbound
   packets and destination TU port for inbound packets) in the

Srisuresh & Egevang                                             [Page 8]

Internet Draft               Traditional NAT                October 1998

   TCP/UDP header. ICMP header in ICMP Query packets must  also
   be modified to replace the query ID and ICMP header checksum.
   Private host query ID must be translated into assigned ID on
   the outbound and the exact reverse on the inbound. ICMP header
   checksum must be corrected to account for Query ID translation.

4.2. Checksum Adjustment

   NAT modifications are per packet based and can be very compute
   intensive, as they involve one or more checksum modifications
   in addition to simple field translations. Luckily, we have
   an algorithm below, which makes checksum adjustment to IP, TCP,
   UDP and ICMP headers very simple and efficient. Since all these
   headers use a one's complement sum, it is sufficient to calculate
   the arithmetic difference between the before-translation and after-
   translation addresses and add this to the checksum. The algorithm
   below is applicable only for even offsets (i.e., optr below must
   be at an even offset from start of header) and even lengths
   (i.e., olen and nlen below must be even). Sample code (in C) for
   this is as follows.

Srisuresh & Egevang                                             [Page 9]

Internet Draft               Traditional NAT                October 1998

   void checksumadjust(unsigned char *chksum, unsigned char *optr,
   int olen, unsigned char *nptr, int nlen)
   /* assuming: unsigned char is 8 bits, long is 32 bits.
     - chksum points to the chksum in the packet
     - optr points to the old data in the packet
     - nptr points to the new data in the packet
     long x, old, new;
     x=~x & 0xFFFF;
     while (olen)
         old=optr[0]*256+optr[1]; optr+=2;
         x-=old & 0xffff;
         if (x<=0) { x--; x&=0xffff; }
     while (nlen)
         new=nptr[0]*256+nptr[1]; nptr+=2;
         x+=new & 0xffff;
         if (x & 0x10000) { x++; x&=0xffff; }
     x=~x & 0xFFFF;
     chksum[0]=x/256; chksum[1]=x & 0xff;

4.3. ICMP error packet modifications

   Changes to ICMP error message will include changes to IP and
   ICMP headers on the outer layer as well as changes to the
   headers of the packet embedded within the ICMP payload due
   to error.

   In order for NAT to be completely transparent to the host, the
   IP address of the IP header embedded within the payload of the
   ICMP packet must be modified, the checksum field of the same
   IP header must correspondingly be modified, and the ICMP header
   checksum must also be modified to reflect changes made to the

   In a NAPT setup, if the IP message embedded within ICMP happens
   to be a TCP, UDP or ICMP Query packet, you will also need to
   modify the appropriate TU port number within the TCP/UDP header
   or the Query Identifier field in the ICMP Query header.

Srisuresh & Egevang                                            [Page 10]

Internet Draft               Traditional NAT                October 1998

   Lastly, the IP header of the ICMP packet must also be modified.

4.4. FTP support

   As noted in [REF1], one of the most popular applications,
   "FTP" would require an ALG to monitor the control session
   payload to determine the ensuing data session parameters.
   FTP ALG is an integral part of most NAT implementations.

   The FTP ALG would require a special table to correct the TCP
   sequence and acknowledge numbers with source port FTP or
   destination port FTP. The table entries should have source
   address, destination address, source port, destination
   port, delta for sequence numbers and a timestamp. New entries are
   created only when FTP PORT commands or PASV responses are seen. The
   sequence number delta may be increased or decreased for every FTP
   PORT command or PASV response. Sequence numbers are incremented
   on the outbound and acknowledge numbers are decremented on the
   inbound by this delta.

   FTP payload translations are limited to private addresses and
   their assigned external addresses (encoded as individual octets
   in ASCII) for Basic NAT. For NAPT setup, however, the translations
   must be extended to include the TCP port octets (in ASCII)
   following the address octets.

4.5 DNS support

   Considering that sessions in a traditional NAT are predominantly
   outbound from a private domain, DNS ALG may be obviated from use in
   conjunction with traditional NAT as follows. DNS server(s) internal
   to the private domain maintain mapping of names to IP addresses for
   internal hosts and possibly some external hosts. External DNS
   servers maintain name mapping for external hosts alone and not for
   any of the internal hosts. If the private network does not have an
   internal DNS server, all DNS requests may be directed to external
   DNS server to find address mapping for the external hosts.

4.6. IP option handling

   An IP datagram with any of the IP options Record Route, Strict
   Source Route or Loose Source Route would involve recording or
   using IP addresses of intermediate routers. A NAT intermediate
   router may choose not to support these options or leave
   the addresses untranslated while processing the options. The
   result of leaving the addresses untranslated would be that
   private addresses along the source route are exposed end to

Srisuresh & Egevang                                            [Page 11]

Internet Draft               Traditional NAT                October 1998

   end. This should not jeopardize the traversal path of the
   packet, per se, as each router is supposed to look at the
   next hop router only.

5. Miscellaneous issues

5.1. Partitioning of Local and Global Addresses

   For NAT to operate as described in this draft, it is necessary
   to partition the IP address space into two parts - the private
   addresses used internal to stub domain, and the globally
   unique addresses.  Any given address must either be a private
   address or a global address. There is no overlap.

   The problem with overlap is the following. Say a host in stub A
   wished to send packets to a host in stub B, but the global
   addresses of stub B overlapped the private addressees of stub A.
   In this case, the routers in stub A would not be able to
   distinguish the global address of stub B from its own private

5.2. Private address space recommendation

   The RFC listed in ref[1] has recommendations on address space
   allocation for private networks. Internet Assigned Numbers
   Authority (IANA) has three blocks of IP address space, namely,, and for private
   internets. In pre-CIDR notation, the first block is nothing but
   a single class A network number, while the second block is a set
   of 16 contiguous class B networks, and the third block is a set of
   256 contiguous class C networks.

   An organization that decides to use IP addresses in the address
   space defined above can do so without any coordination with IANA
   or an Internet registry. The address space can thus be used
   privately by many independent organizations at the same time,
   with NAT operation enabled on their border routers.

5.3. Routing Across NAT

   The router running NAT should not advertise the private networks to
   the backbone. Only the networks with global addresses may be known
   outside the stub. However, global information that NAT receives from
   the stub border router can be advertised in the stub the usual way.

   Typically, the NAT stub router will have a static route configured
   to forward all external traffic to service provider router over WAN

Srisuresh & Egevang                                            [Page 12]

Internet Draft               Traditional NAT                October 1998

   link, and the service provider router will have a static route
   configured to forward NAT packets (i.e., those whose destination
   IP address fall within the range of NAT managed global address list)
   to NAT router over WAN link.

5.4. Switch-over from Basic NAT to NAPT

   In Basic NAT setup, when private network nodes outnumber global
   addresses available for mapping (say, a class B private network
   mapped to a class C global address block), external network
   access to some of the local nodes is abruptly cut off after the
   last global address from the address list is used up. This is
   very inconvenient and constraining. Such an incident can be
   safely avoided by optionally allowing the Basic NAT router to
   switch over to NAPT setup for the last global address in the
   address list.  Doing this will ensure that hosts on private
   network will have continued, uninterrupted access to the
   external nodes and services for most applications. Note,
   however, it could be confusing if some of the applications that
   used to work with Basic NAT suddenly break due to the
   switch-over to NAPT.

6.0. NAT limitations

   [REF1] covers the limitations of all flavors of NAT, broadly
   speaking. The following sub-sections identify limitations
   specific to traditional NAT.

6.1. Privacy and Security

   Traditional NAT can be viewed as providing a privacy mechanism
   as sessions are uni-directional from private hosts and
   the actual addresses of the private hosts are not visible to
   external hosts.

   The same characteristic that enhances privacy potentially makes
   debugging problems (including security violations) more difficult.
   If a host in private network is abusing the Internet in some way
   (such as trying to attack another machine or even sending large
   amounts of spam) it is more difficult to track the actual source
   of trouble because the IP address of the host is hidden in a
   NAT router.

6.2. ARP responses to NAT mapped global addresses on a LAN interface

   NAT must be enabled only on border routers of a stub domain. The
   examples provided in the document to illustrate Basic NAT and

Srisuresh & Egevang                                            [Page 13]

Internet Draft               Traditional NAT                October 1998

   NAPT have maintained a WAN link for connection to external router
   (i.e., service provider router) from NAT router. However, if the
   WAN link were to be replaced by a LAN connection and if part or
   all of the global address space used for NAT mapping belongs to
   the same IP subnet as the LAN segment, the NAT router would be
   expected to provide ARP support for the address range that belongs
   to the same subnet.  Responding to ARP requests for the NAT
   mapped global addresses with its own MAC address is a must in
   such a situation with Basic NAT setup. If the NAT router did
   not respond to these requests, there is no other node in the
   network that has ownership to these addresses and hence will
   go unresponded.

   This scenario is unlikely with NAPT setup except when the single
   address used in NAPT mapping is not the interface address of the
   NAT router (as in the case of a switch-over from Basic NAT to NAPT
   explained in 5.4 above, for example).

   Using an address range from a directly connected subnet for NAT
   address mapping would obviate static route configuration on the
   service provider router.

   It is the opinion of the authors that a LAN link to a service
   provider router is not very common. However, vendors may be
   interested to optionally support proxy ARP just in case.

6.3. Translation of outbound TCP/UDP fragmented packets in NAPT setup

   Translation of outbound TCP/UDP fragments (i.e., those originating
   from private hosts) in NAPT setup are doomed to fail. The reason is
   as follows. Only the first fragment contains the TCP/UDP header that
   would be necessary to associate the packet to a session for
   translation purposes. Subsequent fragments do not contain TCP/UDP
   port information, but simply carry the same fragmentation identifier
   specified in the first fragment. Say, two private hosts originated
   fragmented TCP/UDP packets to the same destination host.  And, they
   happened to use the same fragmentation identifier. When the
   target host receives the two unrelated datagrams, carrying same
   fragmentation id, and from the same assigned host address, it
   is unable to determine which of the two sessions the datagrams
   belong to. Consequently, both sessions will be corrupted.

7.0. Current Implementations

   Many commercial implementations are available in the industry that
   adhere to the NAT description provided in this document. Linux
   public domain software contains NAT under the name of "IP

Srisuresh & Egevang                                            [Page 14]

Internet Draft               Traditional NAT                October 1998

   masquerade". FreeBSD public domain software has NAPT implementation
   running as a daemon. Note however that Linux source is covered
   under the GNU license and  FreeBSD software is covered under the
   UC Berkeley license.

   Both Linux and FreeBSD software are free, so you can buy CD-ROMs
   for these for little more than the cost of distribution. They are
   also available on-line from a lot of FTP sites with the latest

8.0. Security Considerations

   The security considerations described in [REF1] for all variations
   of NATs are applicable to traditional NAT.


   [1] P. Srisuresh, M. Holdrege, "IP Network Address Translator (NAT)
       Terminology and Considerations",
       <draft-ietf-nat-terminology-00.txt> - Work in progress.

   [2] Rekhter, Y., Moskowitz, B., Karrenberg, D., G. de Groot, and,
       Lear, E.  "Address Allocation for Private Internets", RFC 1918

   [3] J. Reynolds and J. Postel, "Assigned Numbers", RFC 1700

   [4] R. Braden, "Requirements for Internet Hosts -- Communication
       Layers", RFC 1122

   [5] R. Braden, "Requirements for Internet Hosts -- Application
       and Support", RFC 1123

   [6] F. Baker, "Requirements for IP Version 4 Routers",  RFC 1812

   [7] J. Postel, J. Reynolds, "FILE TRANSFER PROTOCOL (FTP)",
       RFC 959


       RFC 792

   [10] J. Postel, "User Datagram Protocol (UDP)",  RFC 768

   [11] J. Mogul, J. Postel, "Internet Standard Subnetting Procedure",
        RFC 950

Srisuresh & Egevang                                            [Page 15]

Internet Draft               Traditional NAT                October 1998

   [12] Brian carpenter, Jon Crowcroft, Yakov Rekhter, "IPv4 Address
        Behaviour Today", RFC 2101

Authors' Addresses

   Pyda Srisuresh
   Lucent technologies
   4464 Willow Road
   Pleasanton, CA 94588-8519

   Voice: (925) 737-2153
   Fax:   (925) 737-2110

   Kjeld Borch Egevang
   Intel Denmark ApS

   Voice: +45 44530100
   Fax:   +45 44531415
   http:  //

Srisuresh & Egevang                                            [Page 16]