On 15 feb 2008, at 20:43, Dan Wing wrote: > Such 1-for-1 address rewriting does not provide the topology > hiding that many people seem to like of their existing NAPT > devices, nor does such 1-for-1 address rewriting obscure the > number of hosts behind the NAT. Such obscuring can be useful > for certain businesses (there are, today, small ISPs in certain > countries that do not want their country's PTT to know the > ISP's actual market share, for fear tarrifs or advertising to > compete with the small ISP will be increased).
So how far, exactly, are you prepared to bend over backwards and crack the spine of the IP architecture to accommodate 0.01% or so of its users? Not to mention the cost increases for all the extra protocol layers and debugging that must be borne by the other 99.99%? _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
