> Surely the "much pain" is because, as Melinda Shore indicates, > some "anti-NAT fanatics" cannot understand the distinction > between "who" and "where"? sounds like a Peter Pan theory.... okay, everbody, close your eyes and try *real hard* to make believe that you can route between networks using overlapping address space, and that you can run distributed large scale distributed applications without a shared space for endpoint identifiers... if it doesn't work, you're not trying hard enough to believe! excuse me while I puke. Keith
- Re: NATs *ARE* evil! Valdis . Kletnieks
- Re: NATs *ARE* evil! Keith Moore
- Re: NATs *ARE* evil! Keith Moore
- Re: NATs *ARE* evil! Stephen Sprunk
- RE: NATs *ARE* evil! Iliff, Tina
- RE: NATs *ARE* evil! Pan Jung
- RE: NATs *ARE* evil! Iliff, Tina
- RE: NATs *ARE* evil! David Higginbotham
- RE: NATs *ARE* evil! Chris Millikin
- RE: NATs *ARE* evil! Sean Doran
- RE: NATs *ARE* evil! Keith Moore
- RE: NATs *ARE* evil! Chris Millikin
- RE: NATs *ARE* evil! David Higginbotham
- Re: NATs *ARE* evil! J. Noel Chiappa
- RE: NATs *ARE* evil! Chris Millikin
- Re: NATs *ARE* evil! Kevin Farley
- Re: NATs *ARE* evil! Scott Bradner
- Re: NATs *ARE* evil! Michael Richardson
- Re: NATs *ARE* evil! Keith Moore
- Re: NATs *ARE* evil! Paul Ferguson
- Re: NATs *ARE* evil! Keith Moore