Re: why market picked up NATs [Re: Writeups on why RFC1918 is bad?]

2003-09-23 Thread Michael Thomas
Keith Moore writes: > > From my SF-centric Nexus-of-the-web-trendiod > > standpoint: for residential use (especially with > > broadband) it is simply impossible to have an > > argument about the evils of NAT. > > that's the stupidest thing that's been said here in a long time. > > NATs a

Re: why market picked up NATs [Re: Writeups on why RFC1918 is bad?]

2003-09-22 Thread Michael Thomas
Erik Nordmark writes: > And NATs are used as a technology as part of providing different > user visible capabilities such as > - "connection sharing" from home >From my SF-centric Nexus-of-the-web-trendiod standpoint: for residential use (especially with broadband) it is simply impossible to