RE: NAT in the original Internet (RE: [wg-b] RE: [wg-c] IAB Technical Comment on the Unique)

[Dave Crocker <dcrocker@brandenburg.com>]

At 10:41 PM 12/19/1999 , Roeland M.J. Meyer wrote:
>preventing completion/finalization of the ISO protocols and they were very
>late. DOD became very impatient and decided to go with TCP/IP, as an interim

Work on TCP began in 1972.  Work ISO began later.

In 1976, ISO published the 7-layer model.  It had not yet created any 
protocol specifications.

By contrast, in 1976 the first implementation of TCP was operational.

>measure, until the ISO got its act together (ISO bickering was a LOT like
>what the DNS warz sound like now <grin> [Note: within one year of TCP/IP
>implementation, the ISO "magically" came to agreement and finalized the
>spec, funny how that happened<grin>]).

One or another specification might have finished, but it was not a complete 
suite -- such as lacking routing protocols and solid resolution of a 
standard for addressing -- for many more years.

>However, there were a number of nets already extant. The Internet was
>...
>different addressing schemes. The gateways for all of these required a form
>of NAT to work. This is the basis of my statement. Interfacing to foriegn
>networks was the norm, at that time, and an intrinsic capability of the
>Internet.

Ah, so that IS the source of the confusion:  There was never intended to be 
"gatewaying" in the sense of address translation.  Modern usage of the word 
gateways confuses this point, since in those days IP routers were called IP 
gateways.

However the address space of the base network was entirely independent of 
the IP address space.  No translation.  Each host (workstation, server, 
whatever) was expected to run the IP layer on top of the base networking layer.

d/

=-=-=-=-=
Dave Crocker  <dcrocker@brandenburg.com>
Brandenburg Consulting  <www.brandenburg.com>
Tel: +1.408.246.8253,  Fax: +1.408.273.6464
675 Spruce Drive,  Sunnyvale, CA 94086 USA