> From: Keith Moore <moore@cs.utk.edu>
> The reason that we are explaining (once again) why NAT sucks is that
> some people in this community are still in denial about that
The person who's most in denial around here is you - about how definitively
the market has, for the moment, chosen IPv4+NAT as the best balance between
cost and effectiveness.
Get a grip. We all know you don't like NAT. You don't need to reply to
*every* *single* *message* *about* *NAT* explaining for the 145,378,295th
time how bad they are.
> and those people impair our ability to do useful work. So we're trying
> to educate them, or at least beat them senseless, so they'll get out of
> the way.
Nicely put - your continual flaming about NAT really gets in the way.
Noel