Re: TSVDIR review of draft-ietf-intarea-shared-addressing-issues-02

[Fernando Gont <[e-mail]>]

Joe,

On 02/02/2011 10:49 p.m., Joe Touch wrote:
>>>> When I tunnel using an ISI address, whomever sees my address thinks I'm
>>>> in California.
>>> [..]
>>
>> And one might argue that, in this type of scenario, this "breakeage" of
>> geo-location might, in some cases, be desirable.
> 
> It can't break if it was never intended to work.

I've been attended presentations in which people have argued that this
geo-location thing (i.e., multiple-layers of NATs breaking it) is yet
another motivation for v6. -- I don't buy it (nor do I buy much of the
"NAT is evil" and similar stuff).

But this thing is being used, and if multiple layers of NAT will break
it (or, "will prevent it to work the way it used to", if you prefer), it
should be noted.

The fact that geo-location was not considered in the IP design, is
irrelevant. As noted, IP wasn't meant for production, either.

Thanks,
-- 
Fernando Gont
e-mail: [e-mail] || [e-mail]
PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE A9EF D076 FFF1