> Given the penetration of NAT, particularly in the business world, I > suspect B2B applications that do not work with NAT will not exist too > long. from the little i have seen, because b2b usually wants authentication, authorization, and encryption, a lot of that stuff goes through gateways/ proxies/firewalls that seem to ship with nat turned on by default. often this is not needed <sigh>. randy
- Re: [midcom] WG scope/deliverables Robert G. Ferrell
- Re: [midcom] WG scope/deliverables Ed Gerck
- Re: [midcom] WG scope/deliver... V Guruprasad
- RE: [midcom] WG scope/deliverables Bernard Aboba
- RE: [midcom] WG scope/deliver... Randy Bush
- Re: [midcom] WG scope/deliver... Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [midcom] WG scope/deliverables Steven M. Bellovin
- Re: [midcom] WG scope/deliverables Keith Moore
- Re: [midcom] WG scope/deliverables David R. Conrad
- Re: [midcom] WG scope/deliver... Keith Moore
- Re: [midcom] WG scope/deliver... Randy Bush
- Re: [midcom] WG scope/deliverables Bernard D. Aboba
- Re: [midcom] WG scope/deliver... John C Klensin
- Functionality needed in NATs ... Harald Alvestrand
- Re: [midcom] WG scope/deliverables David R. Conrad
- Re: [midcom] WG scope/deliver... Eric Brunner-Williams in Portland Maine
- RE: [midcom] WG scope/deliverables Fleischman, Eric W
- Re: [midcom] WG scope/deliver... Keith Moore
- Re: [midcom] WG scope/deliverables Sean Doran
- Re: [midcom] WG scope/deliver... Keith Moore
- Re: [midcom] WG scope/deliverables Sean Doran