Hi Scott,
OK, I've got to jump in here and stomp on some these assumptions.
Assumptions that do not belong in a WG Charter.
> NATD is a temporary solution with a limited number of border conditions.
> It is temporary because IPv6 and IPSEC should render it unnecessary in
> the long run. No, I don't think it's a solution in theory, but in fact
> it solves a particular problem.
Not true. IPv6 and IPSEC will not eliminate key functions of NAT.
Particularly for security and network flexibility. NAT is a technology that
will be around for a very long time because is serves a purpose in a overall
network implementation.
> That's my point wrt client autodiscovery protocols: Let's view transparent
> caching as Evil (it deserves a perjorative!) and temporary. Let's propose
> a solution so that administrators might get an extra 15 minutes of sleep
> per night. :-)
This is your personal view. It should not be reflected in the WG Charter.
Policy Based Routing was created from operational requirements! WWW Client
transparency in it's various shapes and form have evolved over time based on
operational EXPERIENCE!
What your doing with this charter discussion is drive you personal view
points against the trends in the WWW Caching Community.
Lets define the charter in a way that pulls in existing work and experience.
Not make assumptions that contradicts the experience of people who've
implemented WWW Caching as a critical component of their network
infrastructure.
Barry
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Nov 18 2004 - 11:21:25 MST