Subject: Re: draft-ietf-nat-protocol-complications-02.txt

From: Masataka Ohta <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 2 May 2000 01:41:01 +0859 ()

Robert;

> WAP and i-mode are *very* different.

FTP and SMTP are *very* different, because SMTP is a lot easier to
pass application/transport gateways.

However, the question of whether it is IP or not is enough to dismiss
iMODE and WAP.

The battle has been and still is fought between the end to end
Internet and intelligent telephone network.

NAT was merely an interim solution for telephone network people
until they are ready with non-IP protocols of iMODE or WAP.

Now, the option is between the stupid Internet with global IP
connectivity and the telephony based intelligent non-IP network
with a lot of application/transport gateways.

There is no ecological niche for intelligent IP network with
a lot of application/transport gateways (NAT), any more.

> i-mode uses native 
> http servers with some relatively transparent html 
> extensions for handsets (such as <a AccessKey="1" href="...). 

For IP community, it means that iMODE is worse than WAP.

For IP community, SMTP is worse than FTP, because SMTP is more
application/transport gateway friendly than FTP.

It is regrettable that some IETF WGs have damaged the Internet trying
to make application/transport layer protocols unnecessarily complex
to be NAT and/or non-IP protocol friendly.

							Masataka Ohta

---

From: John Stracke <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 01 May 2000 14:30:54 -0400

> For IP community, it means that iMODE is worse than WAP.

I'm not sure that's the case.  It sounds like it's easy to develop a Web
site that works both on i-mode and on a standard Web browser; that means
that a site that wants to support i-mode doesn't have to drain off
effort that could otherwise go into improving the site.  Further, since
the site has only one codebase, it probably has only one set of security
holes, rather than two.  Both of these are an improvement over WAP.  The
extra bandwidth that the IP endpoints spend on sending the AccessKey
attribute is regrettable, but probably less of a loss than the
development effort of a dual-mode site.

Didn't someone from DOCOMO present in Adelaide, and say they were
planning to go to running IP in the handsets?

--
/==============================================================\
|John Stracke    | http://www.ecal.com |My opinions are my own.|
|Chief Scientist |=============================================|
|eCal Corp.      |"If nobody believes what I say, I feel       |
[email-masked]|ineffective." "Oh, I don't believe that."    |
\==============================================================/