Subject: Re: (NAT) Alternative name to "Host-NAT"

From: "Mike Borella" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 13:22:43 -0600

A new hostNAT draft will be available soon.  While we'd like to use the
proper name for the draft, maybe folks should take a look at an early
version of the draft (which has changed significantly) in order to get a
better idea what to name it?

-Mike

[email-masked] (Pyda Srisuresh) on 01/16/99 06:08:12 PM

Please respond to [email-masked] (Pyda Srisuresh)

To:   [email-masked]
cc:   [email-masked]  (Mike Borella/MW/US/3Com)
Subject:  (NAT) Alternative name to "Host-NAT"

Folks,

I believe, there is rough consensus to rename "Host-NAT" to something
clearer - something with the flavour of Dynamic Global Adressing (per
Brian's original e-mail).

Below are the alternatives proposed thus far:

     o Network Address and Parameter Allocation (NAPA)

     o External Realm Address Use (ERA) and
       External Realm Address and Port Use (ERAP)

     o Realm Specific Address Use (RSA)
       Realm Specific Address and Port Use (RSAP)

I suggested the last two names. On second thoughts, I would like to
withdraw these names and propose the following name, instead.

     o Realm-Specific IP (RSIP)
       RSIP will refer to both Realm-specific Address IP (RSAIP)
       and Realm-Specific Address and Port IP (RSAPIP).

Thus far, we dont have a name that is roughly agreeable.  We need to
pick a name and move on. Let us try and wrap this up in a week. Please
voice your preference (one of NAPA or RSIP or something entirely new).
Thanks.

cheers,
suresh
-
To unsubscribe, email [email-masked]' with
'unsubscribe nat' in the body of the message.

-
To unsubscribe, email [email-masked]' with
'unsubscribe nat' in the body of the message.

---

From: Rhandeev Singh <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1999 09:11:08 +0800 (SGT)

Just an idea that's been bugging me for a week.

Concerning today's protocols (LDAP, DHCP, HNAT/NAPA/ERA/RSA), how possible
is it to design some grand scheme to use LDAP to manage all the back ends
(NAT and DHCP bindings, etc) for today's protocols (DHCP,
HNAT/NAPA/ERA/RSA, DNS?, L2TP?, etc)?

If we had some mechanism for two generic NAPA mechanisms (a DHCP-based
NAPA and a HNAT-based NAPA, say) to query an LDAP server for their
bindings, then this could serve as the generic back end for the whole
family of NAT, Twice-NAT, Host-NAT, DHCP, ...

Given that the LDAP database is extensible and we design some
caching/signalling mechanism between LDAP and the DHCP/HNAT front ends,
then many of the problems of interoperation might be easier to solve.

(Of course, there'd be a big LDAP database design and performance
headache, but I think it could be worth a try.) 

Then, we could add new LDAP front ends for new functionality.  e.g. "Would
MIB be content to just talk to the LDAP back end?" "Would RAT reduce to an
interface to the LDAP database?"

Is anybody working in this direction (yet)?  Or is this possible at all?

BTW, could NAT be depicted as a special case of HNAT/NAPA/ERA/RSA where
the NAT box is HNAT-capable whereas the client is not?  Would that make
HNAT the most generic NAT?  (We also need to see if Twice-HNAT is
possible.)

---
Rhandeev Singh                          [email-masked]
Linux User Group                        http://linux.comp.nus.edu.sg
School of Computing                     http://www.comp.nus.edu.sg
National University of Singapore                             

-