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

["Randy Presuhn" <randy_presuhn at mindspring.com>]

Hi -

> From: "james woodyatt" <jhw at apple.com>
> To: "Behave WG" <behave at ietf.org>
> Cc: <ietf at ietf.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 2008 4:34 PM
> Subject: Re: [BEHAVE] Lack of need for 66nat : Long term impact to applicationdevelopers
...
> The basic problem with NAT66 is that it introduces the possibility of  
> more than one global IPv6 address realm.  Where there is more than  
> one, there is *any* number, not just the current realm and the single  
> realm on the other side of the relevant NAT66 box.  Fixing your self- 
> address in whatever address realm any given communications peer  
> happens to reside is the canonical problem that NAT causes for  
> applications developers, and NAT66 is no exception to that.
...

>From the peanut gallery...

The potential disconnect between an application's notion of "self"
and how it's identified in the local and big internets is a difficulty
with any kind of NAT and cute DNS tricks.  But weren't these the
kinds of problem HIP was intended to address?

Randy

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