On 07/12/2013 08:16 AM, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote:
And before people start bringing up all the reasons I am wrong here,
first consider the fact that for many years it was IETF ideology that
NATs were a terrible thing that had to be killed. A position I suspect
was largely driven by some aggressive lobbying by rent-seeking ISPs
looking to collect fees on a per device basis rather than per connection.
You are weakening your argument. NATs still are a terrible thing that
need to be killed. They break applications and prevent many useful
applications from being used on the Internet. That much is more
widely understood now than it was 10-15 years ago.
Keith