[13357] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: NAT etc. (was: Spam Control Considered Harmful)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Eric M. Carroll)
Mon Nov 3 15:10:54 1997
Date: Mon, 3 Nov 1997 15:00:26 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time)
From: "Eric M. Carroll" <ecarroll@rogers.wave.ca>
Reply-To: "Eric M. Carroll" <ecarroll@rogers.wave.ca>
To: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <199711031927.LAA08973@puli.cisco.com>
Yakov,
I think were at least I run into Sean's well summarized position is not in
the temporal non-uniqueness, but with the topological non-uniqueness.
Note that temporal non-uniqueness is currently very large granularity
and generally non-survivable. Topologically non-unique addresses appear
to me to compromise a fundamental principle of the Internet, and an
intrinsic component of what makes it valuable.
Can anyone speak to why topological non-uniqueness works and preserves the
value of the system without adding so much additional per packet
complexity as to collapse under its own load at high volumes and rates?
Having to contend with seperate "useage spaces" seems to me to be somewhat
like being taken off the power grid - it can be done, and it will work,
but it tends to require devices that are large, complex and service many
people (ie. private power stations and corporate firewalls).
Eric Carroll eric.carroll@acm.org
Tekton Internet Associates
