On Tue, 27 Apr 2010 10:48:54 PDT, Matthew Kaufman said: > Anyone inventing a new service/protocol that doesn't work with NAT isn't > planning on success.
Only true in the IPv4 world. IPv6 will hopefully be different. > > The answer to these questions isn't a good one for users, so > > as the community that are best placed to defend service quality > > and innovation by preserving the end to end principal, it is > > our responsibility to defend it to the best of our ability. > > > Firewalls will always break the end-to-end principle, whether or not > addresses are identical between the inside and outside or not. The difference is that if a protocol wants to be end-to-end, I can fix a firewall to not break it. You don't have that option with a NAT. > > So get busy - v6 awareness, availability and abundancy are > > overdue for our end users. > > > Maybe. Most of them are perfectly happy. Most of the US population was perfectly happy just before the recent financial crisis hit. Ignorance is bliss - but only for a little while.
pgp37Bg0L9uoK.pgp
Description: PGP signature
