network address translation is the meaning of nat in networking as full form.
network address translation is the meaning of nat in networking as full form.
what is the meaning of nat in networking as full form?
network address translation
bullet::::- internet gateway device protocol (igd) — upnp nat-traversal method









































bullet::::- middlebox









































bullet::::- port triggering









































bullet::::- hairpinning









































bullet::::- subnetwork









































bullet::::- port (computer networking)









































bullet::::- teredo tunneling — nat traversal using ipv6









































bullet::::- carrier-grade nat – nat behind nat within isp.









































section::::external links.









































bullet::::- nat-traversal test and results









































bullet::::- characterization of different tcp nats – paper discussing the different types of nat









































bullet::::- anatomy: a look inside network address translators – volume 7, issue 3, september 2004









































bullet::::- jeff tyson, howstuffworks: "how network address translation works"









































bullet::::- routing with nat (part of the documentation for the ibm iseries)
network address translation
the two-book version most likely arose under the influence of the canon law collection known as the "collectio canonum vetus gallica". as mentioned above, the "paenitentiale umbrense" survives in a "full form", and in a "half form". so far as can be determined, the "half form" first arose in corbie between 725 and 750, when the "vetus gallica" collection was undergoing revision and expansion. those responsible for revising the "vetus gallica" had not long before acquired a copy of the "paenitentiale umbrense", which they decided to include in their revised collection. for whatever reason, the corbie revisers were interested only in the final fourteen canons of the "paenitentiale umbrense", and it was these canons alone that they included in the appendix to the corbie redaction of the "vetus gallica". thus began the tradition of the "half form" version of the "paenitentiale umbrense". the corbie redaction of the "vetus gallica" was very successful and very soon after its creation it was enjoying wide circulation in france, germany, bavaria and northern italy. as a result, far more copies of the "half form" version of the "paenitentiale umbrense" were read and copied — either as part of the "vetus gallica" appendix or as part of derivative canon law collections — than ever were of the stand-alone or "full form" version. the two-book version of the "full form" probably only developed after the "half form" had achieved popularity, that is in the second half of the eighth century or first half of the ninth. since by then most who knew the "paenitentiale umbrense" knew it only in its "half form" version, someone who happened upon the "full form" (which still circulated, though much less widely than the "half") would likely come to believe that that had found a fuller version of the "paenitentiale umbrense". and of course they would be right. however, so used would they be to viewing the last fourteen chapters as a discrete unit that they would insist on dividing the newly (re)discovered "full form" into two books, with the first fifteen chapters comprising a welcome new (or seemingly new) addition to the theodorian corpus, and the last fourteen chapters comprising the already familiar "half form". they would perhaps also have been helped along in their decision to introduce such division by the mention of a "libri secuundi" in the newly (re)discovered prologue. future copies of the now-divided "full form" would preserve the two-book format. centuries later, similar assumptions would be made by nineteenth- and twentieth-century editors, who come to accept as original the two-book format over the twenty-nine chapter format. in 1851 hermann wasserschleben would be convinced by the large number of manuscripts containing the "half form" of the "paenitentiale umbrense", as well as by a single seventeenth century apograph of ms cb exhibiting the two-book format, that the work must have originally been composed with two distinct parts; he was therefore persuaded to ignore the evidence of his two earliest manuscripts (w and w) and print the "paenitentiale umbrense" with a two-book format. subsequent editors would base their editions both on the two-book text as established by wasserschleben and on those manuscripts that were closest or that seemed most ancient to them: these were (for finsterwalder) ms v and (for haddan–stubbs) ms cb, both of which happen to present the "paenitentiale umbrense" in two books. the textual tradition of the "paenitentiale umbrense" has not been studied closely since the work of finsterwalder, and so the evidence (or rather the lack thereof) for their assumptions about priority of the two-book format have gone unexamined.
paenitentiale theodori