From: Keith Moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 13:15:20 -0400
we've had technology for content labelling, and filtering based on
such labels, for awhile. nobody uses it.
a one-bit content label is even harder to use than the PICS stuff.
all of the objections abo
A common concern raised by developers of WebDAV clients and servers is the
deficiencies of HTTP/DAV status reporting. For example, two common problems
are overloading of HTTP status codes to mean several different conditions,
and the inability to precisely report many kinds of status using the
ex
note that private addresses were intended for networks that were
not connected to the internet. the notion was that if you're
not going to connect to the Internet, you don't need to consume
private address space.
NATs didn't enhance the process, they violated the assumption
behind RFC 1918.
PAT = Port Address Translation
Cisco 700 series routers provide PAT, enabling local hosts on a private IP
network to communicate externally.
Packets destined for an external address have their private IP address plus
port number translated to the router's external IP address before the IP
packe
PAT Refers to Port Address Translation
Newton's Telecom Dictionary (16th Edition) notes on p663 PAT is a feature
which lets you number a LAN with inside local addresses and filter them
through one globally routable IP address. PAT can also be called NAT
(Network Address Translation)
Hope this hel
Port Address Translation
www.cisco.com
-Original Message-
From: Peter Burggasser [mailto:"p.burggasser"@uta1002.at]
Sent: Tuesday, 15 August, 2000 3:30 PM
To: Mailinglist
Subject: PAT
hy
could anyone tell me whats PAT on cisco router is ? its in conjunction
with ip domain-lookup on the
Peter,
I am sure there are those who could do a much better job of explaining
this, but here's a little bit of info that I had lying around that might
help.
If this is not accurate, I apologize, but in looking through it briefly it
seemed about right.
Hope it helps...
Best Regards,
Randy
> we've had technology for content labelling, and
> filtering based on such labels, for awhile.
> nobody uses it.
The reason for that is obvious. Content labelling only allows a person to
filter what he sees himself. However, most people are not satisfied to
filter out what they dislike for the
hy
could anyone tell me whats PAT on cisco router is ? its in conjunction
with ip domain-lookup on the router, but i didnt find anything about.
thanks for help
cu peter
> It does not have to be implemented by giving away "half" the
> address space. I don't know where "half" came from.
sorry, I thought they were allocating a bit.
> The only requirement that I arrive at is the presence of
> a globally distinguished prefix, which does not have to
> be particularl
Keith -
| a one-bit content label is even harder to use than the PICS stuff.
|
| all of the objections about this being improper use of the address
| space also apply, but even if those were overcome, the scheme still
| wouldn't solve any problems. it would accomplish nothing except to
| waste h
> What isn't? Partitioning at all, or using this particular partition?
we've had technology for content labelling, and filtering based on
such labels, for awhile. nobody uses it.
a one-bit content label is even harder to use than the PICS stuff.
all of the objections about this being improper
Keith -
| it's not practical in IPv6 either.
What isn't? Partitioning at all, or using this particular partition?
Sean.
> Dividing up the IPv4 address space into
> a "kid-friendly" and "other" space is not really practical.
it's not practical in IPv6 either.
Keith
"Anthony Atkielski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> It isn't really that clever. For one thing, the
> standards for any given category of addresses will vary
> from one community to another,
Ah, no - the clever thing is partitioning the address
space at all. Whether or not this particular partit
Hi,
I am interested in knowing the conformance test for MGCP and SIP. Can
someone here tell me the scheduled bakeoff meetings for MGCP and SIP for
this year and next year.
Thanks,
Yixin Zhu
> Subject: Re: more on IPv6 address space exhaustion
> Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 22:41:40 +0200 (CEST)
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Sean Doran)
> [...]
> Incidentally, this sort of thing reveals to me the stark horror of
> NAT in an IPv6 Internet -- a misfiring rewrite rule could expose innocent
Thomas Narten writes:
| So, once again, it appears
| necessary to point out that approaches that work fine in IPv4 work
| just as well in IPv6. But IPv6 also enables new approaches as well,
| some of which are not really practical in IPv4.
You and I are in perfect agreement, though -- I simply p
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Sean Doran) writes:
> Therefore, IPv6 is wonderful because it allows for a full-fledged
> V-Chip Connectivity Policy, thanks to the difference between
> the way it handles multihoming from classical IPv4.
Sigh. There once again appears to be a major misrepresentation about
wha
> What a committee with the fellow behind PSI (an
> ISP, no less!) on it is proposing is clever: use
> the same general principle with a range
> of IPv6 addresses.
It isn't really that clever. For one thing, the standards for any given
category of addresses will vary from one community to anothe
20 matches
Mail list logo
