[111611] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Mohacsi Janos)
Mon Feb 9 06:39:42 2009
Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2009 12:39:33 +0100 (CET)
From: Mohacsi Janos <mohacsi@niif.hu>
To: Andy Davidson <andy@nosignal.org>
In-Reply-To: <20090209084036.GB15596@chilli.nosignal.org>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
On Mon, 9 Feb 2009, Andy Davidson wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 05, 2009 at 07:19:37PM -0500, Robert D. Scott wrote:
>> Wii should not even consider developing " a cool new protocol for the Wii"
>> that is not NAT compliant via V4 or V6. And if they do, we should elect a
>> NANOG regular to go "POSTAL" and handle the problem. The solution to many of
>> these networking conundrums should rest with the application people, and NOT
>> the network people.
>
> You are wrong, there are lots of new ... and not so new ... protocols that
> *can* work via ALGs or other NAT traversal systems, but tend to work worse
> than if they'd had end to end visibility. The various VoIP protocols are
> the perfect example.
Example please!
Kind Regards,
Janos Mohacsi>
