[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       ipsec
Subject:    Re: IPSEC and NAT
From:       Dan.McDonald () Eng ! Sun ! Com (Dan McDonald)
Date:       1997-08-26 0:32:18
[Download RAW message or body]

> Unfortunately, there's a huge number of companies that very foolishly
> invested a large amount of money in NAT boxes, for better or for worse,
> and the auto industry in particular is apparently committed to spend
> millions to perpetuate this architectural eyesore, because apparently
> would be far more expensive to undo this mistake.
> 
> In any case, NAT is far outside the scope of this working group ---
> although wishing that the problem will go away won't make it so,
> especially if there's enough money in the market places forcing vendors
> to invent solutions that accomodates this fundamentally broken
> technology.

I could make some choice comments here about NAT being what happens when we
don't deploy the _right_ solution (IMHO the right solution is IPv6, or any
IPng) quickly enough.

I could also say that I hope we (and I cheerfully include myself in "we")
don't make the same mistake w.r.t. being too slow to deploy the _right_
solution.

Dan

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]