Re: NAT and firewalling and stuff
"Perhaps you'd like to provide a reference for that statement, since it's never been true to my recollection."
"Despite its origination in the IETF, many in the Internet's standard-setting community have criticized increased NAT usage because it violates the end-to-end architectural philosophy which has underpinned the Internet (and precursor networks) since its inception. Internet engineers first articulated this philosophy in the mid-1980s and later formalized this Internet principle in the IAB's "Architectural Principles of the Internet" document."
Protocol Politics: The Globalization of Internet Governance, Laura DeNardis, p157-8
So like I said, end-to-end accessibility is part of the fundamental nature of the Internet, which NAT violates in one-to-many mode. NAT66 and other one-to-one NATs are fine, however, because they still allow endpoints the ability to be accessed at their discretion (and perhaps that's the thing we need to consider--granting the ability but expecting the responsibility to say no, much like allowing people the vote even if they (like dumb Internet devices) may be too stupid to use it properly).