nanog mailing list archives
Re: SlashDot: "Comcast Gunning for NAT Users"
From: Jon Mansey <jon () interpacket net>
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 11:13:10 -0800
On Thursday, January 31, 2002, at 10:24 AM, Conrad A. Rockenhaus wrote:
snip
When someone's running NAT, the bandwidth is distributed between the users behind the NAT device. If someone's assigned 512K, they can only use up to 512K, be it one computer, or several behind a NAT device.
Ive often pondered the feasibility of port based bandwidth rate control, and if broadband providers would ever actually implement it, whether protected by Ts&Cs or not.
jm
Current thread:
- RE: SlashDot: "Comcast Gunning for NAT Users", (continued)
- RE: SlashDot: "Comcast Gunning for NAT Users" Vivien M. (Jan 31)
- RE: SlashDot: "Comcast Gunning for NAT Users" Patrick (Jan 31)
- Re: SlashDot: "Comcast Gunning for NAT Users" Nathan J. Mehl (Jan 31)
- Re: SlashDot: "Comcast Gunning for NAT Users" Adrian Chadd (Jan 31)
- Re: SlashDot: "Comcast Gunning for NAT Users" E.B. Dreger (Jan 31)
- Message not available
- RE: SlashDot: "Comcast Gunning for NAT Users" Daniel Senie (Jan 31)
- Re: SlashDot: "Comcast Gunning for NAT Users" Stephen Griffin (Jan 31)
- RE: SlashDot: "Comcast Gunning for NAT Users" Deepak Jain (Jan 31)
- Re: SlashDot: "Comcast Gunning for NAT Users" Stephen Sprunk (Jan 31)
- Re: SlashDot: "Comcast Gunning for NAT Users" Jon Mansey (Jan 31)
- RE: SlashDot: "Comcast Gunning for NAT Users" Scott A Crosby (Jan 31)