Michael Thomas <mat(_at_)cisco(_dot_)com> writes:
So just saying that NAT is here get used to it is,
architecturally, not helpful. The split of effort
is to put it mildly a huge drain on engineering
talent, but more importantly the net is becoming
more and more incomprehensible because of it, both
intellectually as well as operationally. That
strikes me as a profound architectural issue, one
that should scare anybody who cares about the net.
So yes, to my mind saying "get used to it" is a
weird position because it discounts the problems
of the status quo and doesn't really express any
vision for what the architecture *ought* to be, or
drive us in a direction which will make that
determination possible. What NAT's are telling us
is that there are requirements that aren't being
met with the current Internet. But that's really
the only thing they should be telling us because
we already know that NAT's fail miserably on other
requirements. We want an architecture that meets
all of the requirements, not a hodgepodge of half
solutions which fall over in the first stiff
breeze.
I can agree with most of this, but I don't think that it's
incompatible with "get used to it". Look at it this way: I'm used to
the fact that I'm bald, even though I don't like it. At some point
there may be something I can do about that and at that point I would
do it. In the meantime, I wear a hat.
-Ekr
--
[Eric Rescorla ekr(_at_)rtfm(_dot_)com]
http://www.rtfm.com/