At 11:34 AM -0700 5/2/02, Scott Francis wrote:
>> And what if I want to invent the next big thing? A game, that people play
>> in real time, with their palm-sized gizmo. What if that game can't be made
>> scalable unless those devices have real IPs? What if that game is the
>> catalyst that cause
At 11:15 AM +0200 5/2/02, Daniska Tomas wrote:
>
>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 -
At 1:20 AM -0700 5/2/02, Scott Francis wrote:
>On Wed, May 01, 2002 at 04:07:34PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
>>
>> You've got to be kidding. Do you think it's clear to the average consumer
>> buying a GPRS phone what NAT is, and why they might or might not want it?
>
>The average customer buy
hat might
sound attractive to the bean counters, but think of the customers you might
never get in the first place. Also, I don't see how deploying NAT could be
a cost savings over requesting real IP space.
-pmb
--
Ring around the Internet, | Peter Bierman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Packet with a bit not set | http://www.sfgoth.com/pmb/
SYN ACK SYN ACK, |"Nobody realizes that some people expend
We all go down. -A. Stern | tremendous energy merely to be normal."-Al Camus
