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.