Talk:NAT traversal

I think this is a very poor and unclear description of NAT traversal. Usually Wikipedia is quite clear and concise regarding IT-related topics. Sometimes documentation is not written clearly because the author does not understand the topic well. Please give examples of NAT traversal configurations related to IPSEC earlier in the description.

Computing: Networking Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Networking task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

Here is an example of a convoluted sentence at the beginning of this topic: "Intercepting and modifying traffic can only be performed transparently in the absence of secure encryption and authentication." How about NAT IP address and port translation can break host to host authentication protocols?

This needs reworking... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.200.194.137 (talk) 17:24, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

Internet Protocol doesn't have "ports"

Encapsulating Security Payload (ESP) - Internet Protocol (IP) port 50 A "port" exists only at the TCP or UDP layer. 76.92.138.240 (talk) 00:52, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Symmetric NAT Traversal with BitJet One SDK

Sorry, I deleted your edit again, for those reasons

1.No reliable sources.

Your company page is no source, which establishes notability. You need some independent source (scientific proceeding, tec magazine, ...)

Even your patent is no

2.Advertizing language, WP needs some technical information

3.Doubts: "so it is able to traverse any symmetric NAT device, even non-deterministic ones", your home page gives a somewhat more complete picture. Your invention and product may be great, but does it solve every symmetric NAT traversal problem in every situation?

--Kgfleischmann (talk) 05:31, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

Carrier Grade NAT

Should this article have details for traversal of Carrier Grade NAT?

I believe that a section that describes traversal from/to a network behind CGNAT would be appropriate, my hang up is with the possibility of it being useful rather than appropriate to the scope of the article. MathsStan (talk) 13:17, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

Reverting my short description edit

Moved from User talk:Kvng § Reverting my short description edit

– ~Kvng (talk) 22:49, 19 March 2026 (UTC)

Hi, I was wondering why you reverted my edit to the short description on NAT traversal. I don't think that the current description (Maintaining connections across network address translators) needs to be that long (58 characters). My understanding of short descriptions is that they disambiguate similar articles and I don't think the article warrants that.

If someone is looking for Network address translation they can easily find it in the link and I feel like the long version makes it harder to understand and gets cut off anyways. Awesomecat (✉ / ✎) 22:39, 19 March 2026 (UTC)

I agree in general but I think that your new description is just as bad as the old one. They're both flawed for different reasons. I'm confident someone can and will come up with something better than either and the existing longer one is probably a better starting point. ~Kvng (talk) 22:47, 19 March 2026 (UTC)

Related Articles