quietly....

Fri Feb 4 01:23:26 UTC 2011

On Feb 3, 2011, at 3:14 PM, david raistrick wrote:

> On Thu, 3 Feb 2011, Valdis.Kletnieks at vt.edu wrote:
> 
>> Well, it's official - the original end-to-end design principal of the Internet is dead, deceased, and buried.  Henceforth, there will be Clients, and there will be Servers, and all nodes will be permanently classified as one or the other, with no changing or intermixing of status allowed.
> 
> Er.  That's not news.  That's been the state of the art for what, 15+ years or so now?   SIP (because it's peer to peer) and P2P are really the only things that actually give a damn about it.
> 
Largely because we've been living with the tradeoff that we had to break the end-to-end model to temporarily compensate for an address shortage. Those of us that remember life before NAT would prefer not to bring this damage forward into an area of address abundance. In other words, yes, we gave up on the end-to-end model and accepted that some innovations simply wouldn't happen for a while. That doesn't mean we want to make that tradeoff or those limitations permanent.

> 
> No one is going to check out their neighbors website running on their neighbors computer if the neighbor didn't make an effort to make their computer a server (by assigning DNS, running server software, etc) regardless of NAT etc etc.
> 

So? That's an extremely narrow view of the potential applications of restored globally unique host addressing.

Owen