Re:A New Future for Icanhazip
by andrewmcwatters on Sunday June 06, 2021 @08:51PM
(#27417833)
This is explicitly wrong. There absolutely is such a thing as a "public Internet" address, which is the exact terminology used by the IETF. NAT isn't a part of the Internet Protocol, but it is well-defined in other related RFCs.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Yes, I know about what the IETF considers a "public Internet address", but it's sort of ill-defined for a lot of standard network topologies. NAT is a technique, not an explicit protocol. The RFCs simply cover the technique as it existed in practice.