Re: [BEHAVE] Lack of need for 66nat : Long term impact to application developers

[Iljitsch van Beijnum <iljitsch at muada.com>]

On 25 nov 2008, at 23:10, Tony Hain wrote:

> Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
> ...
> > But in any event, compared to the backflips through flaming hoops we
> > have to do in IPv4, the asking a remote server what our source  
> > address
> > looks like from the outside to make address based referrals work
> > doesn't seem too onerous. Or do you disagree?

> Who do you ask??? Your note assumes there is only one 'outside', so  
> any
> server could answer the question. There is absolutely no restriction  
> on
> where and how topology warts are deployed, so asking a server in  
> network A
> what your address will appear to be to network B is fundamentally  
> absurd.

Well, the case where my externally visible address is different  
depending on who I talk to makes it fundamentally impossible to set up  
peer to peer connections if the other end is living with the same  
limitation, so we'd have to define this such that only a single  
translation is permitted at a time.

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf at ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf