The Erlang way - dynamic upgrade of a server and UBF extensions
Miguel Barreiro Paz
Wed Apr 30 17:58:41 CEST 2003
> I think you have missed the point in that it is NAT which is ugly.
Sure it is. As hell. But:
- reality says it's needed. Outlaw NAT and half of the people with cable
modems and *DSL routers are banned out of the net.
- with or without NAT, endpoint information (IP addresses, TCP port
numbers) ought to be in its place: as IP headers or TCP headers,
respectively. Tomorrow we will pack it into any other transport without
great problems. If we embed endpoint information *into* payload, we are
looking for trouble.
(RFC1627 meets reality)
More information about the erlang-questions