North American Network Operators Group
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: NAT etc. (was: Spam Control Considered Harmful)

  • From: Alan Hannan
  • Date: Sun Nov 02 12:38:32 1997 
> Yup, it could, but as I noted to Paul, in the cases Sean is advocating,
> the client and the NAT box may not be within the same span of
> administration, either.  IE: no, you may _not_ trust the NAT op.

  In today's internet, the DNS management, the routing
  administration, and the ADM engineer are all outside of central
  administration.

  This is analagous to the case you bring up, and yet we work well.

  Proxy aggregation of address space occurs, and yet the world goes
  on.

  That the NAT administration would be different from that of the
  flow endpoints is orthagonal to the discussion.

  Perhaps you mean that the client won't know where to go because
  the information is changed.  Well, yes, that's what NAT does.
  Send it to an agent aware of the change, or reference that
  modulation, and it will come together.

  -a