Joel Jaeggli wrote:
you might check out the rather sprited discussion during the plenary at
ietf49...
the official proceeding will be up shortly on the ietf website, video of
the event is at:
http://videolab.uoregon.edu/events/ietf/ietf49.html
What can be heard on the audio (some of the question microphones were
not connected to the video capture system) showed a rather less
"spirited" discussion than I thought I'd find based on your message. I
took the opportunity to watch some of the presentations, which helped
provide context (especially Randy's presentation on DNS, and the
comments within on architectural restraint).
The "spirited discussion" consisted of a limited number of people saying
things that either they or others have said before. Perry, for example,
talked about the costs of multiple, overlapping NAT stuffs and the huge
amounts of money that's costing folks. He's made the same point in other
plenaries and in other meetings. What he said is certainly a problem,
and one we'd all like to see disappear. Keith expressed concern
(starting the discussion) that the IETF should be working on a better
architecture to deal with replacing NAT. To do so, we'd have to solve
the customer needs which are driving folks to NAT, of course.
So, in reviewing the video, I saw people generating plenty of heat, but
little light.
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Daniel Senie dts(_at_)senie(_dot_)com
Amaranth Networks Inc. http://www.amaranth.com