-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On tisdag, sep 23, 2003, at 02:32 Europe/Stockholm, Erik Nordmark wrote: > I think there is an overarching issue about deployment/transition > that relates to the NAT thing; > providing a new service/feature/capability by only adding one box to > the network is a lot easier sell than for instance > - requring a box in the peer's network > - requring all the routers in the path to do something new > - requring the ISP to do something new > To be honest I think there is a much simpler reason as to why NAT picked up. The concept of "if the outside world can't see what I have in my network - it must be secure" is much easier to accept by most people than "NAT does not really give you increased security" and "you break the end-to-end model". - - kurtis - -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP 8.0.2 - not licensed for commercial use: www.pgp.com iQA/AwUBP2/tY6arNKXTPFCVEQJPpQCff8Z9cR5i9/Nit4X1hCMNSffUinMAnjgr FcNTE3AgNrKz32ww+rJCPy6M =LMBq -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
