Hi,
On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 11:38:08AM -0700, Roger Marquis wrote:
> Exactly, and that's one of the two main reasons NAT is so popular.
> Residential and commercial network owners and operators don't want their
> internal hosts to be directly reachable.
Is this claim backend anywhere for the "residential" part?
I agree about the "commercial" - they have firewalls, policy-enforcement
devices, and whatnot to achieve this. And if they really really want,
they can use ULAs and HTTP proxying.
"residential" users use NAT today, because that's the only option available
to 99.9% of them. That doesn't mean they want it that way, or that they
would be aware(!) of the choices.
They want protected end-systems (which is achieved by having a host
firewall on every OS on the market today).
But they do want reachability - think of "Windows 7 remote-access user
support" or plain Skype calls (without the help of machines that happen
to be lucky enough and have full Internet connectivity).
Gert Doering
-- NetMaster
--
Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations: 128645
SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann
D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen)
Tel: +49 (89) 32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279
_______________________________________________
nat66 mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nat66
