Just a reminder, people claim that 80% of all IP-based equipment
is never connected directly to "THE Internet"....whatever THE is...

Jim Fleming
http://www.RepliGate.net


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Francis Dupont" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Michael Thomas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, December 21, 2001 8:03 AM
Subject: Re: draft-rajahalme-ipv6-flow-label-00.txt 


> In your previous mail you wrote:
> 
>       I'm afraid this brings us back to the slippery slope
>       of edge-remarkers and the layer violation of routers
>       wanting to look at L4+ headers, and the inherent 
>       difficulty/impossibility.
> 
> => I agree I don't like this but this is a fact.
> BTW if the XXXServ is not for free, I am afraid that
> this (and similar tools like security gateways) is needed
> in order to keep a reasonable control...
> 
>       Please, let's not go there again.
>    
> => I may not throw away a vendor of a well-known router company
> when he proposes to use a "transparent proxy"... Until all boxes
> will be NextToComeServ capable as my BSD boxes, we have to
> bear far worse than managing XXXServ or/and any other advanced
> function at the first router.
> 
> Regards
> 
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> PS: AH is useful, for instance if AH was used with all the tunneling
> stuff under FUD in another thread of this list, the answer would be
> so simple!
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
> IPng Home Page:                      http://playground.sun.com/ipng
> FTP archive:                      ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
> Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> 

Attachment: b1684.gif
Description: GIF image

Reply via email to