> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jake Khuon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: 2. mája 2002 10:51
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Large ISPs doing NAT?
>
>
> DT> and what if one of the devices behind that phone would also be a
> DT> personal "ip gateway router" (or how you call that)... you could
> DT> recursively iterate as deep as your mail size allows you to...
>
> It's possible. Could it get ugly? Yes. Do we just want to
> shut our eyes and say "let's not go there."... well... maybe.
> I just don't think the solution is to say, "this can never
> happen... we must limit all handheld devices to sitting
> behind a NAT gateway."
>
no eye-shutting. it's just about considering HOW MANY (or WHAT PART) of your users
will need the 'full' service. if you have 95% of bfu's with web+mail phones or pda's
then nat is completely ok for them. and those 5% (if so many ever) phreaks - give them
an opportunity to have public ip with no nat for a few bucks more
you will end up with exactly two exactly specified services... not that bad, is it?
--
Tomas Daniska
systems engineer
Tronet Computer Networks
Plynarenska 5, 829 75 Bratislava, Slovakia
tel: +421 2 58224111, fax: +421 2 58224199
A transistor protected by a fast-acting fuse will protect the fuse by blowing first.