Re: application listener discovery in the presence of stateful firewalls

[itojun@itojun.org (Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino 2.0)]

> everyone--
> 
> This is a continuation of a previous discussion under the subject  
> "Re: The argument for writing a general purpose NAT for IPv6."
> 
> On Apr 26, 2007, at 14:35, Tony Hain wrote:
> > james woodyatt wrote:
> >>
> >> I should also mention that my additional concern about applications
> >> that haven't yet been developed is part of what has me champing for
> >> an alternative to deploying ALG's everywhere.  It would be nice to
> >> have a long-term solution that didn't require constant upgrades to
> >> the middleware.
> >
> > That was the point of IPv6.
> 
> Perhaps.  I'm not sure it *remains* the point.

	IPv6 NAT?  you moron.  i'll remove Vincent Lubet from merge@kame.
	no new information will nor help will reach Steve.
	even if you give me 8core MacTower, i won't. i will never forgive you
	if you implement NAT in AirPortExtremeSuperDuper.
#	sorry for foul language.  too much stress and sleepless nights.
#	how come you can think i could go to bed?

itojun