Greg; > I could make the argument that they provide Internet access, in the > sense that one can use these providers to gain access to a subset of > content and services that is "traditionally" called Internet service. > I would support them being classified as Internet Access Providers > (IAPs). In some circles, that's what they're called. Your points are taken that you can call them WASP (Web Access Service Providers). Masakaka Ohta
- RE: draft-ietf-nat-protocol-complications-02.txt BookIII, Robert
- RE: draft-ietf-nat-protocol-complications-02.txt Vernon Schryver
- Re: draft-ietf-nat-protocol-complications-02.txt J. Noel Chiappa
- Re: draft-ietf-nat-protocol-complications-02.txt Keith Moore
- Re: draft-ietf-nat-protocol-complications-02.txt Masataka Ohta
- Re: draft-ietf-nat-protocol-complications-02.txt John Stracke
- RE: draft-ietf-nat-protocol-complications-02.txt Bob Braden
- Re: draft-ietf-nat-protocol-complications-02.txt Masataka Ohta
- Re: draft-ietf-nat-protocol-complications-02.txt Greg Skinner
- Re: draft-ietf-nat-protocol-complications-02.txt Masataka Ohta
- Re: draft-ietf-nat-protocol-complications-02.txt Vernon Schryver
- Re: draft-ietf-nat-protocol-complications-02.txt Keith Moore
- Re: draft-ietf-nat-protocol-complications-02.txt Vernon Schryver
- precedence field and mailing lists Keith Moore
- AOL and standards Keith Moore
- Re: draft-ietf-nat-protocol-complications-02.txt Greg Skinner
- AOL's view of the Net versus the rest Anthony Atkielski
- Re: AOL's view of the Net versus the rest Valdis . Kletnieks
- Re: draft-ietf-nat-protocol-complications-02.txt Greg Skinner
- Re: draft-ietf-nat-protocol-complications-02.txt Eli Sanchez