Keith Moore <moore(_at_)cs(_dot_)utk(_dot_)edu> writes:
I don't know enough about how you're doing your distributing computing
to have an opinion, but as for the other two... In my experience,
IT managers are pretty unhappy punching holes in their firewalls
for incoming SIP and IPsec, whether they run NAT or not.
In my experience, IT managers are generally pretty unhappy changing
anything to support their users. People who actually use the computers
or the network are regarded as a nuisance.
Exactly. So, why do you it's NATs that are the cause of users
not getting the things they want, as opposed to the usual IT
manager behavior.
The bottom line here is what economists call "revealed preference".
Maybe "revealed ignorance" would be a better term. Though I prefer
"unintended consequence".
Huh? The IT managers could not use NAT if they wanted. What
evidence do you have that they consider them a bad tradeoff?
-Ekr
--
[Eric Rescorla ekr(_at_)rtfm(_dot_)com]
http://www.rtfm.com/