> From: Michel Py [mailto:michel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] > Unfortunately some protocol purity zealots still have to realize > that Linksys, Netgear, Belkin and consorts don't sell NAT boxes > because they think NAT is good, they sell NAT boxes because > consumers want to buy them. I do not think consumers in general want to buy NAT boxes, but they are forced to do so by ISP's who do not give them a choice. When not even those of us who can differentiate between different Internet connections by other means then "speed" can manage to get a proper Internet connection (e.g. with multiple fixed addresses), how can we expect regular users to ask for such "advanced" features? Myself, I am stuck with a telco-ISP that do not even provide the option to buy extra IP-addresses (or fixed addresses). This means I am forced to run a NAT at home, and do the tricks to make applications work in this environment (including making servers work, which of course "is not allowed", but why should I care). At several occasions, friends have asked me why some of their communications applications do not work although they have "a premium Internet connection", which meant they had purchased the highest "speed" available. Unfortunately, they have all been fooled by the ISPs that the only difference between different Internet connections is the maximal throughput, and they have ended up in a crappy NETed home environment. But why should ISPs be honest and explain to regular users that there could be better alternatives and that what they are currently selling is a restricted Internet connection? For ISPs, these restricted connections means users have problems running some applications, which reduces the traffic they generate, but the problems users have are not attributed to limitations in what the ISP provides. Only some ISP's openly declare the details of the Internet connections they provide, such as whether IP addresses are fixed or dynamic, if one can get multiple addresses, if IPv6 can be provided, etc. However, some do, and therefore I still believe there is hope, but it is hard for regular users to understand what different alternatives would mean (especially when ISPs are not honest with these matters). _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf