On Sun, 21 Jan 2001 02:22:43 EST, Keith Moore said:
> it is desirable that it be such a network. I remember when the email
> network was a heterogeneous network consisting of UUCP, BITNET, DECnet,
> SMTP, X.400, and a few other things thrown in. It "worked", sort of,
> but we had all kinds of problems with the translations at the boundaries,
Gee thanks Keith... you bring back painful memories of running one of
the bitnet-internet gates. :)
Every few weeks, I'm *still* seeing things sniffing around for our Bitnet
gateway. The interesting part is that the gateway (vtbit.cc.vt.edu) isn't
in the DNS anymore, hasn't been for close to 18 months, and I only *see*
these screw-ups if they manage to find the machine that *used* to be the
*unpublizised* MX front-end for the gateway.
Let's stamp out NAT, *now* - before it becomes too entrenched and we can
never get rid of it. We don't need that sort of "worked" again.
Valdis Kletnieks
Operating Systems Analyst
Virginia Tech
- Re: Number of Firewall/NAT Users Keith Moore
- Re: Number of Firewall/NAT Users J. Noel Chiappa
- Re: Number of Firewall/NAT Users Ed Gerck
- Re: Number of Firewall/NAT Users Matt Holdrege
- RE: Number of Firewall/NAT Users Richard Shockey
- Re: Number of Firewall/NAT Users Keith Moore
- Re: Number of Firewall/NAT Users Valdis . Kletnieks
- Re: Number of Firewall/NAT Users Henning Schulzrinne
- Re: Number of Firewall/NAT Users Keith Moore
- Re: Number of Firewall/NAT Users Keith Moore
- Re: Number of Firewall/NAT Users Valdis . Kletnieks
- Re: Number of Firewall/NAT Users Joel Jaeggli
- Re: Number of Firewall/NAT Users Daniel Senie
- Re: Number of Firewall/NAT Users Matt Holdrege
- Re: Number of Firewall/NAT Users Daniel Senie
- Re: Number of Firewall/NAT Users Keith Moore
- Re: Number of Firewall/NAT Users Matt Holdrege
- Re: Number of Firewall/NAT Users Matt Holdrege
- Re: Number of Firewall/NAT Users Henning Schulzrinne
- Re: Number of Firewall/NAT Users Matt Holdrege
- Re: Number of Firewall/NAT Users Keith Moore
