IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: IPv6, interNAT, Wi-Fi (not mobile)

Harald Tveit Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no> Thu, 27 March 2003 09:36 UTC

Received: from ran.ietf.org (ran.ietf.org [10.27.6.60]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id EAA21046; Thu, 27 Mar 2003 04:36:17 -0500 (EST)
Received: from majordomo by ran.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.10) id 18yTv5-0003Vp-00 for ietf-list@ran.ietf.org; Thu, 27 Mar 2003 04:43:35 -0500
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([10.27.2.28] helo=ietf.org) by ran.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 18yTul-0003Ui-00 for ietf@ran.ietf.org; Thu, 27 Mar 2003 04:43:15 -0500
Received: from eikenes.alvestrand.no (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id EAA20944 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 27 Mar 2003 04:27:58 -0500 (EST)
Received: from [192.168.1.4] (askvoll.hjemme.alvestrand.no [192.168.1.4]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id B55686238C; Thu, 27 Mar 2003 10:30:17 +0100 (CET)
Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2003 10:30:17 +0100
From: Harald Tveit Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
To: John Stracke <jstracke@centive.com>, ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: IPv6, interNAT, Wi-Fi (not mobile)
Message-ID: <921410000.1048757417@askvoll.hjemme.alvestrand.no>
In-Reply-To: <3E80E057.4090203@centive.com>
References: <2ED12612-5F14-11D7-A4BB-000393414368@yahoo.com> <3E80E057.4090203@centive.com>
X-Mailer: Mulberry/2.2.1 (Linux/x86)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-ietf@ietf.org
Precedence: bulk
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Tastes much like a MANET network to me.

--On tirsdag, mars 25, 2003 18:03:51 -0500 John Stracke 
<jstracke@centive.com> wrote:

> S Woodside wrote:
>
>> In addition I recently had to cope with the hassles of setting up an
>> H.323 connection (with ohphoneX) from behind a firewall at both ends
>> and immediately concluded that people on any kind of wireless mesh
>> that uses NAT are going to be severely limited since they aren't truly
>> a part of the internet.
>
> Right.  The problem is that what I've seen in the past is that
> wireless-mesh proponents want to be able to do massive multihoming, with
> all participants with external links sharing those links, and all the
> traffic from the outside finding the shortest way in.  I won't say it's
> impossible, but last I heard nobody knew how to do it; the route flap
> would be horrible.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email