W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-discuss@w3.org > December 2002

RE: Application protocols and Address Translation

From: Paul Hoffman / IMC <phoffman@imc.org>
Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2002 19:11:58 -0800
Message-Id: <p05200f34ba14740f6622@[165.227.249.18]>
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 EST

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Tuesday, 24 February 2004 19:46:25 EST