John Bartas wrote: > We may not have to worry about it - NAT is now illegal > in 4 of the United States, and counting: > > http://news.com.com/2100-1028-994667.html
I don't see anything in that article that applies to NAT's. It's about copyrights not about IP addressing maybe that's why I don't see it ;) > One thing I have not seen addressed in this thread is anonymity. One > reason I wrote my first NAT in 1996 was because I can do things on the > net (like send this email), and no one could trace it back any further > than my company DSL link. It's up to me if I want to identify myself or > not. > > I don't see any good way to do this without NAT, which has well > understood drawbacks. > > If IPv6 has a better anonymity solution, can someone point me to it? Or > do I have to start working on NATv6? (See, this is why I don't always > want to identify myself! :-) Email is SMTP which runs on top of TCP/IP. You could just let your SMTP service not log any headers and tada you are 'anonymous'. This is an application 'problem' not a stack 'problem'. Then again if you want to be 'anonymous' then don't use the internet there fortunatly are enough ways to find a person who is using it. Then again there are also enough ways of making finding a person quite hard. If you want to be anonymous you probably have something to hide which is not normal to do or not even talking about illegal things. And one of the few reasons to use 'anonymous' SMTP is to spam, eeuw... Greets, Jeroen -------------------------------------------------------------------- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
