Keith Moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I don't know enough about how you're doing your distributing computing
> > to have an opinion, but as for the other two... In my experience,
> > IT managers are pretty unhappy punching holes in their firewalls
> > for incoming SIP and IPsec, whether they run NAT or not.
>
> In my experience, IT managers are generally pretty unhappy changing
> anything to support their users. People who actually use the computers
> or the network are regarded as a nuisance.
Exactly. So, why do you it's NATs that are the cause of users
not getting the things they want, as opposed to the usual IT
manager behavior.
> > The bottom line here is what economists call "revealed preference".
>
> Maybe "revealed ignorance" would be a better term. Though I prefer
> "unintended consequence".
Huh? The IT managers could not use NAT if they wanted. What
evidence do you have that they consider them a bad tradeoff?
-Ekr
--
[Eric Rescorla [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.rtfm.com/
