I've heard that NATs can cause a small amount of latency in a network. What is the alternative to NATing?

Answer 1

NAT can only cause lacency if you are using low spec hardware or the number of NAT transactions is too high. If you're using NAT for security only, try a firewall, hardware or software.

Answer 2

NAT does cause a very small amount of latency, as does any other "hop" on a network. However, they are a very potent defense against intrusion. Generally, the alternative to using address translation would slow you down more, IE, software firewalls. Depending upon your network structure, your intrusion detection point will vary so your strategy will have to adapt accordingly. However, it's best practice to keep NAT enabled, especially if the only thing between you and the outside world is a single router.

Answer 3

Not NATing, of course. But that introduces a huge additional set of problems, such as trying to firewall your network effectively and exposing your entire network to attack if a firewall is breeched.

Then of course is the issue of having to pay for all ofthose public IP addresses and developing business reasons for them, largely explaining why you can't use NAT.

The amount of latency from NAT -- assuming that your system is properly designed -- won't have any functional impact you your system.

Answer 4

The only good alternative is to use native addressing. Generally, this is not worth it, as the latency from the NAT is on the order of microseconds.

Answer 5

theonly reason you wouldnt want to nat is if you are doing p2p or trying to run an xbox 360 on your network, other then that dont worry about it. i don't p2p, but let be tell you nating an xbox 360 is a death setence if you plan to play xbox live with out serious connection issues.