Re: myth of the great transition

To: Keith Moore <moore at cs.utk.edu>
Subject: Re: myth of the great transition
From: S Woodside <sbwoodside at yahoo.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 00:45:53 -0400
Cc: ietf at ietf.org
In-reply-to: <20030618153911.49945ac0.moore@cs.utk.edu>
Sender: owner-ietf at ietf.org


On Wednesday, June 18, 2003, at 03:39  PM, Keith Moore wrote:

I think it would be more accurate to say that a NAT contravenes
the basic Internet prnciple of universal connectivity.


expecting the network
to isolate insecure hosts from untrustworthy attackers, or more
generally, to enforce policy about what kinds of content are
permitted to pass, has always been a stretch.

So where do firewalls fit into your picture? Do they represent for the network or for the hosts?

simon


--
www.simonwoodside.com -- 99% Devil, 1% Angel

Follow-Ups:
- Re: myth of the great transition
  - From: Keith Moore

References:
- Re: myth of the great transition (was US Defense Department forma lly adopts IPv6)
  - From: Keith Moore

Prev by Date: Re: myth of the great transition (was US Defense Department forma lly adopts IPv6)
Next by Date: Re: NATs are NOT Firewalls
Previous by thread: Re: myth of the great transition (was US Defense Department forma lly adopts IPv6)
Next by thread: Re: myth of the great transition
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: myth of the great transition

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