See <ftp://ftp.ietf.org//internet-drafts/draft-eastlake-ip-mime-03.txt>.
Donald
From: Magnus Danielson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 10:40:40 +0200
>From: Masataka Ohta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: Re: WAP Is A Trap -- Reject WAP
>Date: Wed, 21 Jun 0 5:42:32 JST
>
>> Phil;
>>
>> > >IP over NAT is, in no way, end-to-end.
>> >
>> > >WAP and IP over NAT are equally bad.
>> >
>> > I think you're overstating your case. Yes, IP over NAT is bad, but
>> > it's nowhere near as bad as WAP.
>>
>> If you think so, don't say "end-to-end".
>>
>> > If you want, it is still possible to "reconstruct" a true end-to-end
>> > IP service by tunneling it through a NAT with something vaguely
>> > resembling mobile IP.
>>
>> You can have IP over HTTP, IP over XML or IP over WAP equally easily.
>
>With IP over MIME you could even establish an IP connection over a mail
>gateway, firewall bypassing... Hmm.... the same goes for http proxies.
>
>> The problem, however, is that the reconstruction point is an
>> intelligent gateway which violates the end to end principle.
>
>Havent we learned to love and hate these breaking of layering?
>
>You can put basically anything over anything else when it comes to just moving
>bits around. While doing this we get the additional benefits of increased
>propagation delay, increased overhead, often complexer solutions and a new
>bag of problems in the interworking area. Lovely. We can feed a lot of
>research and engineer mouths this way.
>
>Now, while NAT and WAP both intend to solve some problems, they provide ground
>for new problems which naturally require new solutions. We should really ask
>weither some of these problems really should be solved within that scope or
>not. If IP over WAP is a bag of worms, maybe one should bypass WAP alltogether.
>Where we know that neither ATM, IP or NAT solves all the problems neither will
>WAP.
>
>It is not really what you could do as what you should do. Naturally there is
>allways politically and technical preferences which prohibits some solutions.
>
>Cheers,
>Magnus
>
