The End-To-End Internet (was Re: Blocking MX query)

[mohta at necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp (Masataka Ohta)]

Oliver wrote:

>>> You're basically redefining the term "end-to-end transparency" to suit
>>> your own
>> Already in RFC3102, which restrict port number ranges, it is
>> stated that:
>>
>>     This document examines the general framework of Realm Specific IP
>>     (RSIP).  RSIP is intended as a alternative to NAT in which the end-
>>     to-end integrity of packets is maintained.  We focus on
>>     implementation issues, deployment scenarios, and interaction with
>>     other layer-three protocols.
> 
> Just because something is documented in RFC does not automatically make it a
> standard, nor does it necessarily make anyone care.

That's not a valid argument against text in the RFC proof read by
the RFC editor as the evidence of established terminology of the
Internet community.

>> It's you who tries to change the meaning of "end to end transparency".

> Denial: not just a river in Egypt.

Invalid denial.

						Masataka Ohta