Re: [BEHAVE] Lack of need for 66nat : Long term impact to application developers

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
> On 23 nov 2008, at 20:25, Tony Hain wrote:
> 
>> The fundamental problem here is that the voices of those bearing the
>> costs
>> in the core are being represented, while the voices of those doing
>> application development are not being heard.
> 
> Not sure that's entirely true...
> 
> But in any event, compared to the backflips through flaming hoops we
> have to do in IPv4, the asking a remote server what our source address
> looks like from the outside to make address based referrals work doesn't
> seem too onerous. Or do you disagree?

absolutely it's too onerous.  why in the world should an application's
deployability depend on the existence of a server that lives in global
address space -- or for that matter, on a bank of servers that exist to
do nothing but forward traffic?  isn't that what the network is supposed
to do?

Keith
_______________________________________________

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

[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]