Re: [BEHAVE] Can we have on NAT66 discussion?

On 11/13/08 10:06 AM, Hallam-Baker, Phillip allegedly wrote:
> 
> I beleive that the question would not arise If we had a coherent
> Internet architecture
>  
> The idea that an application can or should care that the IP address of a
> packet is constant from source to destination is plain bonkers. It was
> no an assumption in the original Internet architecture and should not be
> an assumption that any application should rely on.

That's not the problem.  The issue is location.  Once we have
established a session then how the packets are labeled for network layer
purposes doesn't matter much (modulo security) but how do we get
communications set up in the first place?  Suppose I want to reach
"foo".  Who do I ask to find a locator for him?  Split DNS works fine
when there are just two states, inside and outside -- a DNS server can
be configured to know how to respond in each case.  But if you were to
sprinkle NATs all over the Internet there would be no place that could
give a confident answer about how I, over here, should name foo in the
network layer in order to get a packet to him, and have that answer get
to me in the correct form.  So it is very important to understand where
we think it might be safe to put what kinds of NATs.

swb

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf