Hi.
Just s quick question please.
Some articles I have read seem to blurr Proxy's with NAT, and Im a tad in the dark.
I had the idea that NAT changed the packet header to make it look like the data was coming from the server (instead of the computer with the private Ip that sent it), and then changed it back to the internal address once the data returned??
The thing I read seemed to suggest that a Proxy performes NAT as well?? or did they mean that it just has the same end result??
I know that a Proxy retrieves the information on behalf of the client, but Im wondering if I have some termanology wrong here.
And while Im at it, is there a technical difference between NAT and MASQ??
Thanks for your time

Wazza (confused)

Proxy's don't need to NAT, beucase as you said they get the data on behalf of the client. NAT in linux is called IP Masquerading - they're the one and the same.

You terminilogy is actually pretty accurate. They don't always achieve the same results as NAT'ing is transparent to the client machine so your client software doesn't need to know anything about it, unlike when you use a proxy - if you client software doesn't understand the proxy then you've got no external connection. Proxy's allow for some very complex rules about who can access what and give you much better accountabilty as they can log who accessed what, when and from where. Caching proxys can also help you save bandwidth if the same people are trying to access the same data all the time.

HTH

Jamie...

Thanks for the quick reply Jamie, all clear now

Wazza