At 02:38 PM 1/20/2001, Jim McMurry wrote:
Then it seems we will have to create an ever expanding bandwidth to support
all the overhead associated with NAT and these multiple layers.
The overhead comes in the form of complexity rather than bandwidth.
But complaining about NAT is not a new fad and usage of NAT hasn't been
stemmed the tiniest bit. We can't keep burying our heads in the sand and
trying to deny new work on dealing with NAT. It's here, it isn't going away
and we have to find solutions for applications that need to deal with NAT.
Work in this area is starting in the new MIDCOM working group. But some
people are still worried about being politically correct with respect to
denying the perceived legitimacy of NAT. I think we need to go full force
in finding solutions in an open standards group rather than having a closed
group solve the problem in an inelegant fashion.