IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: draft-ietf-nat-protocol-complications-02.txt

Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> Mon, 10 July 2000 13:50 UTC

Received: by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) id JAA09017 for ietf-outbound.10@ietf.org; Mon, 10 Jul 2000 09:50:02 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from rip.psg.com (rip.psg.com [147.28.0.39]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA08499 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 10 Jul 2000 09:35:55 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from randy by rip.psg.com with local (Exim 3.13 #1) id 13Bdit-000PFI-00; Mon, 10 Jul 2000 06:35:47 -0700
From: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: Masataka Ohta <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
Cc: Jon Crowcroft <J.Crowcroft@CS.UCL.AC.UK>, ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: draft-ietf-nat-protocol-complications-02.txt
References: <2889.963214057@cs.ucl.ac.uk> <200007100836.RAA14137@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
Message-Id: <E13Bdit-000PFI-00@rip.psg.com>
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 06:35:47 -0700
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Loop: ietf@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

>> I would go further - first to define by exclusion, secondly to define
>> a new class of providers (according tro common uisage) so that
>> discussion can proceed 
> 
> My intention is to provide a semi permanent definition as an Informational
> RFC.
> 
> It is important to make the definition protected by bogus opinions
> of various bodies including IETF.

of course you will exuse the providers if we continue to be perverse and
find new business models.

randy

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email