Harald,
My take (which is obviously biased) is that the number of NAT devices 2
years from now is likely to be significantly larger than the number of NAT
devices currently deployed.
And - here I am making a real leap of faith - if the IETF recommendations
for NAT devices make manufacturers who listen to them create NAT devices
that make their customers more happy, then many of these new NAT devices
may be conformant to IETF recommendations.
I think this ship has left port a long time ago and the likelihood that the
IETF can now effect enough change to make it possible to write new
applications that work consistently in the presence of NATs is very
low. The installed base is much to large and NAT is showing up in devices
being built by people who don't pay too much attention to the IETF. The
same folks who do not build in IPv6, who break path MTU discovery, who
strip out TCP options, etc. Now we expect them to build "good" NATs...
This is the IETF and if there is a constituency for working on this then I
think it should happen. However, I hope no one will be surprised in 2-3
years that nothing much has changed.
Bob
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf