[arin-ppml] Just a reminder of some quick mathematicsfor IPv4that shows the long term impossibility of it

[Blake Dunlap]

On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 11:27, Chris Engel <cengel at conxeo.com> wrote:

> Mark,
>
> > NAT isn't up to a matter of opinion. It is a matter of what the
> > Internet's design architecture is, and whether NAT can fit within that
> > architecture. NAT breaks end-to-end reachability and transparency
> > between the edges of the Internet, which is why it doesn't fit the
> > Internet's design architecture.
> >
>
> The same can be said of firewalls and spam filters and proxy servers. Guess
> what, VERY few people actually want "end-to-end reachability and
> transparency". The survey is out, privacy wins overwhelmingly. I don't WANT
> the inside of my network reachable and transparent to external users.
> Neither do the vast majority of endpoint network operators or individual
> users. We want to expose what we CHOOSE to advertise to the outside
> world....and keep everything else private....and we are willing to accept
> extra cost and complexity involved in running certain types of applications
> in order to do that.
>
> On the Enterprise side of things, of which I am very familiar, most don't
> tend to WANT decentralized application models (i.e. peer-to-peer). They want
> to mandate that applications have to go through a central known point in
> order to be able to function properly. That facilitates better monitoring
> and application of policy on said applications, as well as easier support,
> in many cases.
>
> (snip)
>
> I know EXACTLY what NAT does. It does EXACTLY what I INTEND it to do.
>  That's true for most network admins I'm familiar with as well as with most
> private individuals. I work and am friends with alot of other folks in
> various positions in IT. Not a single one of the people I know DOESN'T run
> RFC-1918 space on their home networks....and address availability has very
> little to do with that. The internet isn't one completely homogenous
> entity....it's thousands upon thousands of individual networks.... each of
> them has their own rules that they play by. If you don't like the rules that
> an individual network plays by....guess what...don't go there...chances are
> you aren't welcome.
>
> Christopher Engel
> (representing only my own views)
>

None of what you just said you want, has anything to do with NAT. This is
what leads people to believe you don't know what NAT does, even while you
yell that you do.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20110517/ae042e80/attachment.htm>