RE: NATs *ARE* evil!

RFC 2993 Architectural Implications of NAT's ?

-----Original Message-----
From: Valdis(_dot_)Kletnieks(_at_)vt(_dot_)edu 
[mailto:Valdis(_dot_)Kletnieks(_at_)vt(_dot_)edu]
Sent: Friday, December 15, 2000 12:55 PM
To: Dave Robinson
Cc: ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Subject: Re: NATs *ARE* evil! 


On Fri, 15 Dec 2000 12:11:29 EST, Dave Robinson said:

What's the problem with locally significant addresses?  Having

thousands of

Hmm.. this from a guy posting from endtoend.com?  I'm not sure if the
right word is "ironic" or "sarcastic".  In any case, didn't we just
release an RFC detailing in excruciating detail?
-- 
                                Valdis Kletnieks
                                Operating Systems Analyst
                                Virginia Tech

<Prev in Thread]	Current Thread	[Next in Thread>
*Re: NATs ARE* evil!*, (continued)* *Re: NATs ARE* evil!*, V Guruprasad* *Re: NATs ARE* evil!*, Denis Mcmahon* *Re: NATs ARE* evil^H^H^H^Hmpls!*, Jon Crowcroft* *Re: NATs ARE* evil!*, Theodore Y. Ts'o* Message not available *Re: NATs ARE* evil!*, V Guruprasad* Message not available *Re: NATs ARE* evil!*, V Guruprasad* *Re: NATs ARE* evil!*, Bill Sommerfeld* Re: naming, RJ Atkinson *Re: NATs ARE* evil!*, Matt Crawford* *RE: NATs ARE* evil!*, Chris Millikin* *RE: NATs ARE* evil!*, David Higginbotham* <= *Re: NATs ARE* evil!*, J. Noel Chiappa* *RE: NATs ARE* evil!*, Chris Millikin* *Re: NATs ARE* evil!*, Kevin Farley* *Re: NATs ARE* evil!*, Scott Bradner* *Re: NATs ARE* evil!*, Paul Ferguson* *Re: NATs ARE* evil!*, Keith Moore* *Re: NATs ARE* evil!*, Michael Richardson* *Re: NATs ARE* evil!*, Keith Moore* *Re: NATs ARE* evil!*, J. Noel Chiappa* *Re: NATs ARE* evil!*, Perry E. Metzger*

Previous by Date:	Re: Congestion control, Harald Alvestrand
Next by Date:	Announcing a new mailing list on middleware, Eliot Lear
Previous by Thread:	*RE: NATs ARE* evil!*, Chris Millikin*
Next by Thread:	*Re: NATs ARE* evil!*, J. Noel Chiappa*
Indexes:	[Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]