RE: end2end? (was: RE: Where NAT disenfranchises the end-user ... )
|> From: Jon Mansey [mailto:jon_mansey@verestar.com] |> Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 12:44 PM |> |> At 12:31 PM -0700 9/7/01, Roeland Meyer wrote: |> >|> From: Jon Mansey [mailto:jon_mansey@verestar.com] |> >|> Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 11:57 AM |> >|> |> >|> I seem to be able to connect to port-forwarded services behind my |> >|> office NAT firewall just fine from my laptop behind my |> >|> home NAT box. |> >|> Whats the problem? |> > |> >Can we talk ... using NetMeeting? |> |> NM, along with IPsec are examples of apps that dont play well here, |> but thats the point, they are apps that have not been written with |> the real world in mind, ie that a good proportion of the edge these |> days is behind NAT. NAT is the first and only method (I won't dignify it by calling it a protocol) that munges the data. Most real protocols only mess with the envelope and leave the data strictly alone. With NAT, its snafu. Now, if we had bi-directional transparency, via a NAT proxyd, it wouldn't hurt so bad. But, such a daemon is impossible to write and, if written, is impossible to deploy. |> Who gives in first here, the app developers (or their marketing |> depts) who decide that supporting NAT is important, or the NAT |> developers who decide they can fix cuseeme or PPTP by re-writing the |> packet data? |> |> I am also playing devil's advocate here somewhat, we all know the |> real solution to lack of IPv4 space, true end2end, and security lies |> with IPv6, right? <grin> 1) Feigned IPv4 addr shortages were ameliorated by recovery of legacy IPv4 allocations (/8s). IMHO, too late to prevent us from doing NAT. 2) Routeing table sizes are a routing architecture problem that won't go away wrt IPv6. They will only get worse there. <personal opinion> Whomever shot down IPv6 imbedded routing, needs to be taken out and shot in turn. The counter-arguments were not convincing, IMHO. I thought it was a great idea. There is nothing inherently wrong with imbedding the routing into the protocol itself and it sure helps (a bunch) to standardize things. </personal opinion>
participants (1)
-
Roeland Meyer