Re: The End-To-End Internet (was Re: Blocking MX query)

[Masataka Ohta <mohta () necom830 hpcl titech ac jp>]

Oliver wrote:

> > > You're basically redefining the term "end-to-end transparency" to suit
> > > your own
> > Already in RFC3102, which restrict port number ranges, it is
> > stated that:
> >
> >     This document examines the general framework of Realm Specific IP
> >     (RSIP).  RSIP is intended as a alternative to NAT in which the end-
> >     to-end integrity of packets is maintained.  We focus on
> >     implementation issues, deployment scenarios, and interaction with
> >     other layer-three protocols.
>
> Just because something is documented in RFC does not automatically make it a
> standard, nor does it necessarily make anyone care.

That's not a valid argument against text in the RFC proof read by
the RFC editor as the evidence of established terminology of the
Internet community.

> > It's you who tries to change the meaning of "end to end transparency".

> Denial: not just a river in Egypt.

Invalid denial.

                                                Masataka Ohta