--On tirsdag, juni 17, 2003 19:33:24 -0700 "Hallam-Baker, Phillip"
<pbaker(_at_)verisign(_dot_)com> wrote:
On Tuesday, June 17, 2003, at 11:51 AM, Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote:
> The key in my view is to work on the NAT vendors, instead
of viewing
> NAT
> boxes as an obstacle they should be seen for what they
really are, an
> essential and important part of the internet infrastructure.
you obviously don't write applications.
No, because I design and use applications I really wish that the IETF
had designed a decent NAT box spec rather than adopting the ostrich
position.
Phil,
at the risk of feeding into a long-burning flamewar:
when you say "a decent NAT box spec", what do you think of?
As far as I can tell, a NAT box contains, over and above what it does
because it's a router, a firewall or any other thing it might do:
- Address translation
- Application layer gatewaying
- Remote control of the NAT functionality (already being worked on in
MIDCOM)
So what did you want a "decent NAT box spec" to say?
Harald, genuinely curious