- From: Paul Hoffman / IMC <phoffman@imc.org>
- Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2002 19:11:58 -0800
- To: discuss@apps.ietf.org
At 6:27 PM -0800 12/4/02, Dan Wing wrote: >Except for STUN and (perhaps) other MIDCOM WG items, and except in >IPSec-over-UDP and -TCP which exist primarily to better traverse NATs. So, >perhaps the wording should be something like "unless expressly designed, >IETF protocols are only guaranteed without NATs". You can be more strict than that. IPsec-over-UDP will *better* traverse NATs, but will fail a fair amount. "Some protocols are designed to deal with NATs (although they still fail sometimes), and all other protocols are only guaranteed without NATs." --Paul Hoffman, Director --Internet Mail Consortium
Received on Wednesday, 4 December 2002 22:16:39 UTC