RE: How the IPnG effort was started

["Peter Ford" <peterf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Title: Re: How the IPnG effort was started

 

Noel,

 

You are sorely under-representing the IETF's and your own efforts wrt NATs.    I think of your taxonomic study of NATs much in the same vein as Carl Linnaeus's "Systema Naturae".   

 

In fact, given the intellectual contributions by the think tank inside the IETF to NATs, the working groups on NATs, and the protocol engineering for NATs devised in the IETF, one would think that we can credit the IETF with NATs and the emergent Internet NAT architecture, guided by the IESG and overseen by the IAB.

 

One of the more interesting things we may encounter in the post-IPv4 era is a great simplication, but not elimination of NATs.   In other words: NATs become strictly address re-writers for IPv6 addresses.   And yes, some of the ongoing research in NAT architecture will probably make it into the IPv6 world.  I can easily imagine a world where hosts use NATs and IPv6 simultaneously and I suspect this might be a next-gen firewall technology.  People seem to forget that people buy NATs for IP address sharing and firewalling.    They don't seem to "get it" that there are very few people who would ever buy a NAT because of IPv4 address limitations.

 

regards, peterf

 

 

---

From: ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx on behalf of Noel Chiappa
Sent: Sat 11/20/2004 1:06 PM
To: ietf@xxxxxxxx
Cc: jnc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: How the IPnG effort was started

    > From: kaih@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Kai Henningsen)

    >> To put it another way (and mangle a well-known phrase in the process),
    >> if life gives you lemons, you can either sit around with a sour look
    >> on your face, or make lemonade. NAT's make me look sour too, but I'd
    >> rather make lemonade.

    > Except I cannot see a way to make lemonade from NATs.

There are all sorts of people doing so, in at least three projects I can think
of.

I'd name them, except that they probably don't need the attention - it could
well result in pressure to shut any IETF component down, because it's not the
One True Religion Which Is Going To Take Over The World.

Then again, they'd probably just happen outside the IETF purview anyway, the
way NAT did.

        Noel

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

_______________________________________________

Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf