Hi -
From: "james woodyatt" <jhw(_at_)apple(_dot_)com>
To: "Behave WG" <behave(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>
Cc: <ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>
Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 2008 4:34 PM
Subject: Re: [BEHAVE] Lack of need for 66nat : Long term impact to
applicationdevelopers
...
The basic problem with NAT66 is that it introduces the possibility of
more than one global IPv6 address realm. Where there is more than
one, there is *any* number, not just the current realm and the single
realm on the other side of the relevant NAT66 box. Fixing your self-
address in whatever address realm any given communications peer
happens to reside is the canonical problem that NAT causes for
applications developers, and NAT66 is no exception to that.
...
From the peanut gallery...
The potential disconnect between an application's notion of "self"
and how it's identified in the local and big internets is a difficulty
with any kind of NAT and cute DNS tricks. But weren't these the
kinds of problem HIP was intended to address?
Randy
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf