[EMAIL PROTECTED] (David Conrad) writes: > On Oct 15, 2005, at 3:27 PM, Tony Li wrote: > > When we explored site multihoming (not rehoming) in the ways that > > you seem to suggest, it was effectively a set of coordinated NAT > > boxes around the periphery of the site. That was rejected quite > > quickly. > > What were the reasons for rejection?
i wasn't there for that meeting. but when similar things were proposed at other meetings, somebody always said "no! we have to have end-to-end, and if we'd wanted nat-around-every-net we'd've stuck with IPv4." -- Paul Vixie
