6 Sep
2012
6 Sep
'12
12:45 a.m.
On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 9:39 PM, Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com> wrote:
On Sep 5, 2012, at 21:08 , Masataka Ohta <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> wrote:
Jimmy Hess wrote:
NAT would fall under design flaw, because it breaks end-to-end connectivity, such that there is no longer an administrative choice that can be made to restore it (other than redesign with NAT removed).
The end to end transparency can be restored easily, if an administrator wishes so, with UPnP capable NAT and modified host transport layer.
This is every bit as much BS as it was the first 6 times you pushed it.
Yep.