nanog mailing list archives
RE: Large ISPs doing NAT?
From: "Daniska Tomas" <tomas () tronet com>
Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2002 20:17:15 +0200
-----Original Message----- From: Tony Rall [mailto:trall () almaden ibm com] Sent: 30. aprÃla 2002 19:59 To: nanog () merit edu Subject: Re: Large ISPs doing NAT? On Monday, 2002-04-29 at 08:43 MST, Beckmeyer <beck () pacbell net> wrote:Is anybody here doing NAT for their customers?I hope not. If you're NATing your customers you're no longer an ISP. You're a sort-of-tcp-service-provider (maybe a little udp too). NAT (PAT even more so) breaks so many things that it would be unconscionable to advertise as an ISP. Even some tcp apps fail under NAT. The NAT box may include a number of "fix-ups" but such will never be equivalent to giving the customer a public address.
well.. yes and no. depends on definition and how you set the services. i don't know how you treat this in u.s. but in europe gprs is mostly considered being a value-added service to gsm instead of a real internet connectivity replacement. if you think of gprs a bit it will never have enough capabilities to serve as a full-time inet service. it's a great solution for accessing your data remotely but it's very limited in means of capacity and then you have those 'pdp-contexts' or how they call it. it's just another acronym for a vpn... if a corporate user requires full ip connectivity then why not give him a vpn uplink directly to their hq and the users can safely use private addresses according to corporate policy. in this way gprs is very similar to mpls. i have worked on gprs-mpls vpn integration and it works just fine.
An Internet Service Provider gives the customer a full connection to the Internet. All IP protocols should work.
you also may give the [common] user an opportunity to have 'limited' service set (so you can use private addresses + nat/pat) for lower price or pay a bit more for 'full' service. i think the 'limited' in real life can safely cover requirements of 95% of the customers. do you think they will download mp3's and avi's via gprs? how? :)) from my point of view if you cover http, e-mail and various similar services you will provide most user with more than they ever would expect, wouldn't you?
I'm in favor of using NAT only where there is a good argument for it and the customers are given the straight story about what they're buying and what it won't be able to do. Don't call yourself an ISP.
...
Tony Rall
deejay -- Tomas Daniska systems engineer Tronet Computer Networks Plynarenska 5, 829 75 Bratislava, Slovakia tel: +421 2 58224111, fax: +421 2 58224199 A transistor protected by a fast-acting fuse will protect the fuse by blowing first.
Current thread:
- Large ISPs doing NAT? Beckmeyer (Apr 29)
- Re: Large ISPs doing NAT? Marshall Eubanks (Apr 29)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: Large ISPs doing NAT? Beckmeyer (Apr 29)
- Re: Large ISPs doing NAT? Marshall Eubanks (Apr 29)
- Re: Large ISPs doing NAT? David Conrad (Apr 29)
- Re: Large ISPs doing NAT? Bill Woodcock (Apr 30)
- RE: Large ISPs doing NAT? Daniska Tomas (Apr 29)
- Re: Large ISPs doing NAT? Tony Rall (Apr 30)
- Re: Large ISPs doing NAT? Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino (Apr 30)
- RE: Large ISPs doing NAT? Daniska Tomas (Apr 30)
- RE: Large ISPs doing NAT? kevin graham (Apr 30)