nanog mailing list archives
RE: Where NAT disenfranchises the end-user ...
From: Jim Shankland <nanog () shankland org>
Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2001 22:49:24 -0700
Tony Hain writes:
Roeland Meyer wrote:... Then consider that most developers are NOT network engineers. They expect the network to *be there*, period.Or more completely, they expect the network to be transparent so that every port at the destination IP address connects to the same machine, and there is no operational restriction on which end initiates the communication.
Nicely put. Of course, that model does not correspond to reality, nor is it ever likely to. Traffic is always going to be controlled, filtered, redirected, and translated at administrative boundaries. Global, packet-level, end-to-end connectivity is dead, until somebody comes up with a compelling argument for why a Windows PC in an Internet cafe in Sofia, Bulgaria needs unfettered, packet-level access to a Coke machine in a break room at Sun Microsystems in Palo Alto. Like the battleship that radios a request for the lighthouse to move out of its way, detractors of NAT seem to be waiting for the world to modify itself to accomodate their end-to-end model. Eric Hall <ehall () ehsco com> has expressed the position succinctly:
The fact is that I can write an Internet-compliant application in about two minutes that will break every NAT ever sold, simply because they don't have a proxy for the protocol. NATs violate fundamental Internet principles.
Many stupid things can be done in about two minutes. This particular fundamentalist tenet has been at odds with reality since the first firewall was installed, and will only become more so. Jim Shankland
Current thread:
- Where NAT disenfranchises the end-user ... Roeland Meyer (Sep 06)
- Re: Where NAT disenfranchises the end-user ... Doug Clements (Sep 06)
- Re: Where NAT disenfranchises the end-user ... Bob K (Sep 06)
- Re[2]: Where NAT disenfranchises the end-user ... Richard Welty (Sep 06)
- Re: Where NAT disenfranchises the end-user ... Bob K (Sep 06)
- Re: Where NAT disenfranchises the end-user ... Charles Sprickman (Sep 06)
- Re: Where NAT disenfranchises the end-user ... Eric A. Hall (Sep 06)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- RE: Where NAT disenfranchises the end-user ... Roeland Meyer (Sep 06)
- RE: Where NAT disenfranchises the end-user ... Tony Hain (Sep 06)
- Re: Where NAT disenfranchises the end-user ... David Howe (Sep 06)
- RE: Where NAT disenfranchises the end-user ... Jim Shankland (Sep 06)
- Re: Where NAT disenfranchises the end-user ... Eric A. Hall (Sep 06)
- RE: Where NAT disenfranchises the end-user ... Mike Batchelor (Sep 07)
- RE: Where NAT disenfranchises the end-user ... Brian Whalen (Sep 09)
- Re: Where NAT disenfranchises the end-user ... Christian Kuhtz (Sep 09)
- RE: Where NAT disenfranchises the end-user ... Tony Hain (Sep 06)
- Re: Where NAT disenfranchises the end-user ... Doug Clements (Sep 06)
- Re: Where NAT disenfranchises the end-user ... Josh Richards (Sep 06)
- Re: Where NAT disenfranchises the end-user ... Jeff Mcadams (Sep 06)
- Re: Where NAT disenfranchises the end-user ... David Howe (Sep 07)