[I've taken the bulk of my response to Ed's last reply to private
mail, since I assume few here are interested in tedious arguments
about exactly how the Internet is analogous to the postal system,
but I'll just make his one public observation:]
At 9:45 PM -0800 2/15/01, Ed Gerck wrote:
I agree
Ed, you seem to be ignoring the difference between identification,
location, and routing. What the post office does is routing, not NAT.
The NAT problem is a problem because IP addresses mix the concepts
of identification and location in a single bit string. There's nothing
natural about it, at
List:
My example of the UK postal system, with addresses that behave as names,
was NOT an attempt to make a parallel between the postal system and the
full glory of the Internet. BTW, I don't believe in such parallels. Sorry to disapoint
those that thought so! ;-)
My sole puprose with that
At 8:12 AM -0800 2/16/01, Ed Gerck wrote:
1. there is a natural need for heterogeneous address systems and,
Agreed.
2. therefore, there is a natural need for address translation.
Only if there's some need to interconnect them, and even then only as
a temporary measure, if at all, because there
1. there is a natural need for heterogeneous address systems and,
okay
2. therefore, there is a natural need for address translation.
no. it doesn't follow, at least not in the sense of address translation
as done by NAT. there is a natural need for *routing* or *mapping*
between higher
Steve Deering wrote:
At 8:12 AM -0800 2/16/01, Ed Gerck wrote:
1. there is a natural need for heterogeneous address systems and,
Agreed.
2. therefore, there is a natural need for address translation.
Only if there's some need to interconnect them, and even then only as
a temporary
"Steven M. Bellovin" wrote:
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Ed Gerck writes:
Actually, in the UK you can do just what you wish ;-)
You give a name to your house (say, "The Tulip") and
the post office knows where The Tulip is. If you move,
you can do the same at your new location,
At 3:41 PM -0800 2/15/01, Ed Gerck wrote:
"Steven M. Bellovin" wrote:
You give a name to your house (say, "The Tulip") and
the post office knows where The Tulip is. If you move,
you can do the same at your new location, provided
there is no conflict.
...Note that this is a natural
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Ed Gerck writes:
"Steven M. Bellovin" wrote:
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Ed Gerck writes:
Actually, in the UK you can do just what you wish ;-)
You give a name to your house (say, "The Tulip") and
the post office knows where The Tulip is. If you move,
Steve Deering wrote:
At 3:41 PM -0800 2/15/01, Ed Gerck wrote:
You give a name to your house (say, "The Tulip") and
the post office knows where The Tulip is. If you move,
you can do the same at your new location, provided
there is no conflict.
...Note that this is a natural
"Steven M. Bellovin" wrote:
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Ed Gerck writes:
"Steven M. Bellovin" wrote:
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Ed Gerck writes:
Actually, in the UK you can do just what you wish ;-)
You give a name to your house (say, "The Tulip") and
the post office
Ed Gerck [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Steve Deering wrote:
At 3:41 PM -0800 2/15/01, Ed Gerck wrote:
You give a name to your house (say, "The Tulip") and
the post office knows where The Tulip is. If you move,
you can do the same at your new location, provided
there is no conflict.
Steve Deering wrote:
At 6:21 PM -0800 2/15/01, Ed Gerck wrote:
...
In Internet NAT terms, "The Tulip" is the globally routable IP number for
my DSL, the post office is my NAT box and the physical address
"545 Abbey St." is the local, non-routable IP number of my host A.
That would be
13 matches
Mail list logo
