From: ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx on behalf of Magnus Westerlund
Sent: Wed 11/26/2008 10:20 AM
To: peter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: 'IETF Discussion'
Subject: Re: [BEHAVE] Lack of need for 66nat : Long term impact to applicationdevelopers
Please,
any input into this debate shall go to the behave list. People
interested in this topic please subscribe to Behave.
Regards
Magnus
Peter Dambier skrev:
> Keith Moore wrote:
>
>> 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?
>
> That is what bothers me too. sip is mostly peer to peer, so for most
> of your communication (in megabytes) no server in a rack needed.
>
> Email, with fixed IPv6 addresses will become peer to peer again too.
>
> html? html is not much traffic. Many people do html hehind their NAT44
> boxes today.
>
> There is still a lot to be done for zeroconf, so DNS still is ok
> with a server in a rack.
>
> Oh, I forgot. For DNS you are still dependent on IPv4.
>
> All the enthusiasts with their linux and freebsd boxes using ISATAP
> to communicate don't see a need for NAT66. It is the big guys with
> big windows servers who really need NAT66 to hide their fragile
> machines from the bad wild internet.
>
> I am one of those poor guys who has never been told what good NAT66
> can do for him. I am still troubled by NAT44 preventing me from
> connecting with my ISATAP interface.
>
> I am running more than one computer. That is why I am imprisoned
> behind my NAT44 and I am afraid NAT66 will be yet another prison.
>
> I have seen with tunneling (slow as molasses) I get only a single /128.
> So I guess a bilingual router will sit on both his single IPv4 and
> another single IPv6 and keep all the traffic for himself letting
> me do the guesswork how to drill the holes I need to connect to
> the internet.
>
> I see with IPv6 I do have to compete with my fridge and the
> central heating drilling holes to talk to the butcher, the baker
> and the oil-tanker. None of them is living in a rack in a colocation.
> They all have to drill holes into their NAT66 to talk to my home.
>
> There is a hole industry living from selling me super excluse
> and expensive drilling machinery, I would not need if there was
> not a NAT66 in the first place.
>
> I know NAT44 is like my front door and keeps the bad internet out.
> But it is not NAT44, it is the firewall who keeps them out.
>
> Only a vague feeling for symmetry keeps telling me I should have
> a NAT66.
>
> Math is telling me that need not be true. IPv4 brought us from
> point to point clothes line to 2-dimensional space spanning
> continents. IPv6 will bring us 3-dimensional space spanning
> the globe and DNT will bring us even further. I do not know if
> there is such a thing as NAT66 existing.
>
> In 2-D space we do have trigons, squares, pentagons, hexagon...
> In 3-D space live stops with things built from pentagons.
>
> The guys with their big windows servers behind NAT44 are living
> in a 2-D world, dreaming their 2-D dreams bout selling us
> 3-D NAT66 boxes without even knowing the math.
>
> Kind regards
> Peter
>
--
Magnus Westerlund
IETF Transport Area Director & TSVWG Chair
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Multimedia Technologies, Ericsson Research EAB/TVM
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ericsson AB | Phone +46 10 7148287
Färögatan 6 | Mobile +46 73 0949079
SE-164 80 Stockholm, Sweden| mailto: magnus.westerlund@xxxxxxxxxxxx
----------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf