Re: Yet a different perspective on NAT

the main reason you don't get static ip's with unlimited expansion of address 
space possiblity is to stop your network from growing. 
NAT isn't routable. period.

telcos are in fear that users will make better infrastructure using modern, 
dirt cheap technology, like broadband wireless (up to 144Mbit cards are on 
the market), optic links (up to 10Mbit homemade devices i saw already, up to 
1km distance) and fiber optic networks (up to 1Gbit , and distance can be 
~40km, making it possible to connect two distant towns , assuming terrain 
allows that... and fiber optic can be dragged along with power lines, as 
fiber optic cable is dielectric, light and electrical-interference prone)

then using proper routing tables you could have 'own' , independent internet, 
i.e . having 1Mbit broadband to the world , and 1Gbit to all towns around.

with NAT'ed connections you're stuck with your ISP, and as an 'extra' both 
ends are behind firewall.







On Sunday 03 August 2003 23:31, Tom Scott wrote:
> First let me say, that I hesitate long to differ with John Walker. I am
> a long time user of AutoCad and  somewhat more recent admirer of his
> handiwork with SpeakFreely. I think we can all agree that Mr. Walker
> ranks as one off the towering contributors to what we consider "personal
> computing". That said, I must respectfully disagree with this notion
> that NAT somehow constitutes "big brother" run amok!
>
> I venture to guess that the vast majority of NAT servers are precisely
> like my case where I have a home LAN connected to a higher bandwidth
> internet service, where the bandwidth is shared by three to five users.
> For every large institutional setting that employs NAT I venture to
> guess that there may be hundreds that will  become thousands that look
> just like my case. In short, if Mr. Walker's scenario were correct, I'm
> the "Big Brother", and so are many of you. There is a large and growing
> market of consumers who will pay for network firewalls and NAT servers
> that provide the capability of intelligently and securely traversing
> same for SF-like peer transactions. Rather than spelling the end of peer
> networking, the Internet is enabling an age of cottage industry
> communications that one could only dream of when Mr. Walker and I were
> beginning to be interested in computers (I am just about precisely his
> age and have observed much the same history, albeit through somewhat
> different perceptual filters I gather).
>
> I agree with others that this is no case for weeping, wailing, and
> hand-wringing; but rather, with great thanks to John Walker for the
> enormous contributions he has made, and acknowledging his need to take
> some much needed respite, it is a time for others to take up the mantle
> and carry it forward to tackle these new challenges. The internet will
> change and grow and likely become many things we do not today envision,
> but it is first and foremost the world's most democratic marketplace and
> will continue to defy the efforts of any individual to constrain it
> much. I am among those who wish there were some way to restrain certain
> of its most offensive excesses, and hope we can find some means of
> taming it a bit in the best interests of the majority of users, knowing
> full well even that is a very tall order.
>
> Make no mistake, if the NAT and firewall security issues can be
> addressed successfully and this tool made easier to master for a larger
> marketplace of users, perhaps requiring improved NAT and firewall tools,
> it can become successful well beyond our imagination. One of the
> requirements that has delayed such applications for a long time, readily
> available endpoint bandwidth, is rapidly becoming available to vast
> numbers of users. In this time of austere economic spending, restricted
> travel budgets, and internationalized markets, I have little doubt in
> the viability of VOIP and V&VOIP applications. I suspect that without
> much difficulty, some technical advances of the kind that this community
> is discussing,  could catapult SFng and applications like it into a kind
> of success that none of us can imagine. I will be very surprised if our
> children don't view casual video and voice discussions with others half
> a world away as casually as we have come to view color TV (yes, I
> remember when it seemed peculiar and B&W TV was still new).
>
> It is likely that John Walker, like many visionaries, has been well
> ahead of his time, and having become discouraged at the pace of the rest
> of us trying to catch him, despairs of his vision every being realized.
> History will tell which future we will have, but I will be very
> surprised to find a future where we don't take very much for granted
> much that would please John Walker.
>
> Ps: Pleae forgive the longwindedness, I hope it has not seemed just so
> much "hot-air"!
>
>
> - Tom Scott
>
>
>                       * * *
>
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send E-mail containing
> the word "unsubscribe" in the message body (*not* as the
> Subject) to [email protected]

-- 
-- 

                      * * *

To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send E-mail containing
the word "unsubscribe" in the message body (*not* as the
Subject) to [email protected]