Re: IPv6 tranisition issues

----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian E Carpenter" <[email protected]>
To: "Marcelo Barbosa Lima" <[email protected]>
Cc: <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, January 09, 2003 9:08 AM
Subject: Re: (ngtrans) IPv6 tranisition issues


> Marcelo Barbosa Lima wrote:
> ...
> >
> >   I think that you are correct to current NAT implementations. But I
think that it is possible implement applications-specific NAT.
>
> That's not a NAT. That's an application level gateway (ALG) including
> NAT functionality.
>
> This requires every NAT-ALG vendor to develop new software kludges for
> every new application. Or to put it another way, it prevents innovative
> applications since they cannot penetrate existing NATs. There is no
> doubt that NAT is the single biggest barrier to innovation today.
>
> This is of course why we started developing IPv6 in 1994, so can we
> please get back to that, instead of continuing to waste resources
> discussing NAT?
>
>    Brian
>

Thanks. I was starting to suspect that there was another kind of box that
performs some NAT functions but without creating as many headaches. That
would explain why one of the packages that I tried worked so well.

MIke Cole