On Wed, 12 Dec 2001, cfb wrote:
> Received: from mx7.docomo.ne.jp (fwisp-ext7.docomo.ne.jp
> [220.127.116.11]) by [...]
> ...which looks very similar to a web hit:
> [...] "qfe0" [...] "log" "accept" "http" "fwisp-ext9.docomo.ne.jp"
> "202.[...]" "tcp" "" [...]
> Is any wonder that DoCoMo has a spam problem when they don't even
> policy route outbound e-mail?
Uh...huh? I don't understand what you're trying to say here. I would
almost guess that you feel they should chose names that "look more
different" for the hosts that transfer the outbound e-mail vs. the hosts
that proxy the web requests, but that's really too silly to consider....
> As for the gateways... everyone here knows my feelings about those,
> given my comments about imode phones not really being internet
> connected due to the lack of an globally reachable IP address....
Well, if you start down that road, you end up with much of the world
"not really being internet connected."
1. Most of my office in Japan is not "internet connected" due to
the lack of a globally reachable IP address. (As with many places
where IP address space is scarce, we use NAT.)
2. Most of a bank I worked for in NYC is not "internet connected,"
despite all the hosts having routable IP addresses, because no
traffic can pass between them and hosts outside the firewall.
(Proxies are used for everything.)
3. Hosts in many other offices I've seen are not "internet connected"
because, though they can make most sorts of outgoing connections,
incoming connections are (except for a few protocols) blocked
by the firewall.
4. [Well, we've probably already eliminated a good third to half the
hosts in the world that people can browse the web and send e-mail
from, but keep going here step by step until we've eliminated 80%
of "the Internet."]
But even that aside, I posit that it would have been Just Plain Dumb for
Docomo to make the keitais "real" hosts rather than using a proxy. Using
a proxy allows a different (and more efficient) protocol to be used
between the phone and the proxy than between the proxy and the web server.
This is a big win. At 9600 bps or less, the headers in a standard HTTP
request or reply can add noticable (i.e., user-visible) latency, and the
phone doesn't need most of them. And then, running TCP over PDC's data
channel is something you'd really rather not do if you're interested in
using it efficiently.
Curt Sampson <cjs_at_cynic.net> +81 90 7737 2974 http://www.netbsd.org
Don't you know, in this new Dark Age, we're all light. --XTC
Received on Thu Dec 13 04:27:22 2001