This is not anti-nat religion. There are costs that every application
developer has to absorb to deal with topology warts, and the people that are
focused on their little part of the problem space refuse to acknowledge
those costs. They also refuse to recognize the fact that these costs are
multiplied many times over due to the breadth of the application development
space. In terms of the overall costs to the system, squeezing a cost out of
the core forces a much larger cost spread all around the edges.
The fundamental problem here is that the voices of those bearing the costs
in the core are being represented, while the voices of those doing
application development are not being heard.
Tony
-----Original Message-----
From: behave-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
[mailto:behave-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org] On
Behalf Of Fred Baker
Sent: Friday, November 21, 2008 10:08 PM
To: alh-ietf(_at_)tndh(_dot_)net
Cc: behave(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org WG; IAB; IETF Discussion; IESG IESG
Subject: Re: [BEHAVE] Lack of need for 66nat : Long term impact to
application developers
On Nov 21, 2008, at 9:39 PM, Tony Hain wrote:
The discussion today in Behave shows there is very strong peer-
pressure group-think with no serious analysis of the long term
implications about what is being discussed.
Yes, there is a very clear anti-NAT religion that drives a lot of
thought. It's not clear that any other opinion is tolerated.
_______________________________________________
Behave mailing list
Behave(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/behave
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf