On Mon, Jul 22, 2002 at 09:26:24PM -0500, Austad, Jay wrote:
> Well, if you're offering service using this, you need to look at
> this from a support perspective too.  If we give everyone a private
> address behind a NAT device, we're going to have all sorts of people
> calling because they can't play Warcraft III, or whatever the game
> of the day is.  It does offer the benefit of a bit more security for
> people on the network, but in all reality, 90% of users don't care
> about security and they just want their online games to work.  Many
> people who get broadband get it specifically to play games on.
> There is some firewall trickery that we could probably use to get
> most protocols to work, but there are still going to be things that
> won't.

Uhm, with the weird latency things I have seen with wireless, online
gaming would be the least of my worries.

[big snipper]

Excellent questions.

Mike Horwath           IRC: Drechsau         drechsau at Geeks.ORG
Home: 763-540-6815  1901 Sumter Ave N, Golden Valley, MN  55427
Opinions stated in this message, or any message posted by myself
through my Geeks.ORG address, are mine and mine alone, period.