> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Day [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> >
> >No. it's the world's biggest NAT, and NAT *breaks the end-to-end
> >model of IP*.
>
> Well, there is a big difference between WAP's breaking the e2e model
> and i-mode. WAP does an application gateway and uses no Internet
> protocols. At least, i-mode is using IP, TCP, HTTP, etc.
John,
Who cares what protocol a device runs as long as it delivers the
application that satisfies its intended users? Most subscribers
couldn't care less if i-mode used CLNP and TP4 instead of IP and TCP.
i-mode is interesting because it uses a sub-set of html, which makes
life lot easier for web based application designers.
> Accusing them of breaking it, then puts the vast majority of subnets
> connected to the Internet into the same category. What's your
> point? It hardly seems appropriate to put i-mode and WAP in the
same
> category.
NAT *breaks the end-to-end model of IP*. The biggest problem with NAT
is that you can't deliver "push" applications from a server in the
global realm to devices in the NAT world without using weird proxy
mechanisms. If you do that, that is nothing but a different version of
"WAP".
Cheers,
--brijesh
Ennovate Networks INc.
