quietly....

[jra at baylink.com (Jay Ashworth)]

----- Original Message -----
> From: "Blake Dunlap" <ikiris at gmail.com>

> On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 22:34, Jay Ashworth <jra at baylink.com> wrote:
> 
> > I won't run an edge-network that *isn't* NATted; my internal machines
> > have no business having publicly routable addresses. No one has *ever*
> > provided me with a serviceable explanation as to why that's an
> > invalid view.

> Quite simply, its called Tragedy of the Commons. Everyone else has to
> work harder to provide you services if you are using something which breaks
> end to end connectivity, which costs everyone else money. The protocol
> designers are making a stand against this for the good of the "commons".

You'll have to document "everyone has to work harder to provide me services";
this is not my first rodeo, and TTBOMK, it's *transparent* to the other end
of any connection out of my edge network that it's NATted at my end.

As for incoming connections, it's transparent to them as well -- and which 
ones are valid targets for such connections *is a policy decision of
mine*, not subject to external opinion.

Could you clarify, in some detail, precisely how you get to TotC, Blake?

Cheers,
-- jra