Actually not. The NAT WG is trying to write down information to make the use
of NAT as relatively painless as is possible. I think *this* is exactly the right
topic for the main IETF list - what we are talking about is the survival of
the Internet. Maybe we should ban all other topics for a while.
brian
Ian King wrote:
>
> Can we take this off the IETF list? This sounds like a perfect argument for
> the NAT list, rather than the general IETF list. This has been going on for
> days, and this single subject keeps overflowing my inbox.... -- Ian
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Josh Duffek [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, December 06, 1999 4:05 PM
> To: Josh Duffek; Polinsky, Steven; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: 'Perry E. Metzger'; J. Noel Chiappa; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: IP network address assignments/allocations information?
>
> Classles routing rather :)
>
> Josh
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Josh Duffek [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Monday, December 06, 1999 5:44 PM
> > To: Polinsky, Steven; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Cc: 'Perry E. Metzger'; J. Noel Chiappa; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: RE: IP network address assignments/allocations information?
> >
> >
> > In a perfect world with proper network design I would have to
> > disagree with
> > you. I believe that properly subnetted the private address space
> > allocated
> > would be enough. Classful routing and VLSM should take care of this
> > problem.
> >
> > But in the real world, with not so great network design I have seen many
> > cases where more space is needed.
> >
> > Josh
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Polinsky, Steven [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > Sent: Monday, December 06, 1999 5:20 PM
> > > To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
> > > Cc: 'Perry E. Metzger'; J. Noel Chiappa; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Subject: RE: IP network address assignments/allocations information?
> > >
> > >
> > > I'm not advocating one technology over another. I am claiming
> > that in the
> > > IPV4/Private/Public/NAT world, a bigger pool of Private space
> > > would be a big
> > > help to many organizations.
> > >
> > > Steven
> > >
> > > Steven M. Polinsky
> > > Vice President, Information Technology
> > > Goldman, Sachs & Co.
> > > 180 Maiden Lane
> > > New York, NY 10038
> > > 212-902-3669
> > >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Jeffrey Altman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > Sent: Monday, December 06, 1999 6:08 PM
> > > To: Polinsky, Steven
> > > Cc: 'Perry E. Metzger'; J. Noel Chiappa; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Subject: RE: IP network address assignments/allocations information?
> > >
> > >
> > > > To me the biggest problem here, is the common situation such that
> > > companies
> > > > have separate (and necessary) Internet and Remote Access firewalls. RA
> > > > firewalls exist in multiple global locations within an enterprise.
> > > >
> > > > Multiple instances of the same Private addresses would enter
> > > (or exit) the
> > > > enterprise network via Private lines from different companies
> > if not for
> > > > careful configuration management across and negotiation between "NAT
> > > > Administrators", within the enterprise, and between
> > > enterprises. The most
> > > > difficult part is the negotiation with client/vendor site NAT
> > > Admins as to
> > > > who should NAT which addresses into which addresses. We often need to
> > > > negotiate between 3 RA connected companies. Not only is this
> > > painful, but
> > > > one can never sleep comfortably, knowing that a NAT Admin at a
> > > 3rd company
> > > > will not make a mistake and connect someone new at our NATed address.
> > > >
> > > > There are not enough Private Addresses to go around.
> > >
> > > This sounds to me like more of an argument why private addresses
> > > should be used on networks connected to public networks. It is not
> > > an argument for more private networks but for the move to IPv6 and
> > > the banning of NATs.
> > >
> > >
> > > Jeffrey Altman * Sr.Software Designer * Kermit-95 for Win32 and OS/2
> > > The Kermit Project * Columbia University
> > > 612 West 115th St #716 * New York, NY * 10025
> > > http://www.kermit-project.org/k95.html *
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >
> >
