RE: Number of Firewall/NAT Users

To: "Bernard D. Aboba" <aboba at internaut.com>
Subject: RE: Number of Firewall/NAT Users
From: vint cerf <vcerf at MCI.NET>
Date: Sat, 20 Jan 2001 17:16:52 -0500
Cc: Jiri Kuthan <kuthan at fokus.gmd.de>, ietf at ietf.org
In-reply-to: <Pine.NXT.3.90.1010120143049.538A-100000@internaut.com>
References: <5.0.2.1.2.20010120111040.01c42de8@shoe.reston.mci.net>

a nightmare it seems to me

v

At 02:39 PM 1/20/2001 -0800, Bernard D. Aboba wrote:
>What is worth thinking about is what this will imply for the future 
>internet architecture. It is one thing to address issues brought up by a 
>single well functioning NAT within the same administrative domain. It is 
>another thing to deal with multiple layers of perhaps not so well 
>implemented NATs which may not even support tunneling of IPv6. 
>And that is where we appear to be headed over the next few years.

Follow-Ups:
- RE: Number of Firewall/NAT Users
  - From: Richard Shockey
- Re: Number of Firewall/NAT Users
  - From: Jim McMurry

References:
- RE: Number of Firewall/NAT Users
  - From: vint cerf
- RE: Number of Firewall/NAT Users
  - From: Bernard D. Aboba

Prev by Date: RE: Number of Firewall/NAT Users
Next by Date: Re: Number of Firewall/NAT Users
Previous by thread: RE: Number of Firewall/NAT Users
Next by thread: Re: Number of Firewall/NAT Users
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.

RE: Number of Firewall/NAT Users

Note: Messages sent to this list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.