North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical
RE: Where NAT disenfranchises the end-user ...
Many streaming/multimedia apps try port 80 http if their typical range is not open.. Brian "Sonic" Whalen Success = Preparation + Opportunity On Fri, 7 Sep 2001, Mike Batchelor wrote: > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > > Eric Hall <firstname.lastname@example.org> has expressed the position succinctly: > > > > > The fact is that I can write an Internet-compliant application in > > > about two minutes that will break every NAT ever sold, simply because > > > they don't have a proxy for the protocol. NATs violate fundamental > > > Internet principles. > > > > Many stupid things can be done in about two minutes. This particular > > fundamentalist tenet has been at odds with reality since the first > > firewall was installed, and will only become more so. > > > > Jim Shankland > > Oh yes, the firewall. That convenient device that network software > developers can assume will always pass port 80 and 443 traffic. So > everything uses port 80 and 443 in the future Internet, and we're all the > better for it. > > Uh-huh. > > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.8 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com> > > iQA/AwUBO5kHyEksS4VV8BvHEQJI6wCgm6JoiS11I5g4NkrxnDaZU4nlTAkAoMMu > ll66gu/3u8oaOx+0RGc7bvF+ > =+9g3 > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- >