On Tuesday, March 19, 2002, at 01:10 PM, Keith Moore wrote: > [I wrote:] >> The first thing I would suggest is to sit back and contemplate whether >> the situation bears any resemblance to other problems in which the user >> population engages in behavior that results in short-term personal >> benefit in exchange for long-term harm to the welfare of society. > > granted there are numerous instances of this. but it seems disingenuous > to blame the NAT problem on users when the NAT vendors are doing their > best to mislead users about the harm that NAT does. I did not mean to imply that my employer's customers are to blame for "the NAT problem," or to excuse the NAT vendors (including my employer) who mislead their customers about the harm caused by NAT routers. In the sentence immediately before the one you quoted, I expressed the following opinion (admittedly, as if it were fact): > > [...] the real problem illustrated by the ubiquity of NAT routers in > residential settings: strategic opposition to the end-to-end > architecture among large retail Internet service providers. I could be wrong about this, but I really believe this is the root cause of the NAT problem, not ignorant users or self-interested appliance vendors. -- j h woodyatt <jhw@wetware.com>