Brian,
Thanks for you kind note.
On Nov 16, 2004, at 05:59, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
but unfortunately the work-around (ambiguous addresses and NATs) really only works for a limited subset of applications, apparently including those you use at home.
yeah, not even everything I'd like to do at home works. :-( But, I've learned to live with it.
There is a quite excellent article that describes the gory details at:
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/about/ac123/ac147/archived_issues/ipj_7-3/ anatomy.html
Thanks, I'll review it in detail to see what I can learn from it. It seems like STUN isn't exactly a great choice of a name for the protocol, though, given that it's already used for Serial TUNnelling. :-(
For those who want to innovate, or for those countries whose ISPs are already forced to run multiple levels of NAT, and in particular for countries with on the order of a billion citizens, there simply isn't any doubt that this mess cannot continue. It's a strategic issue, not one that can be understood with our industry's traditional 3 month forward look.
I don't disagree that it seems like things will have to change eventually. I just can't see far enough into the future to see how the change will occur. After unsuccessfully trying to predict these types of changes for the last decade+, I've given up. :-(
I was hoping someone else had some bright ideas that could provide some inspiration.
I too run behind a NAT when I have to. And I can run a few good old fashioned client/server applications. But it isn't 10% of what I could do on a real transparent Internet.
I've just lost track of the bright-eyed future that I had a clear vision of back in 1992. In my experience, if a technology hasn't been readily adopted within a decade of it's creation, it's not going to be. It appears that time is rapidly approaching for IPv6.
I dearly wish someone could rejuvenate my imagination in this area.
--jon
_______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf