nanog mailing list archives

Re: CGN fixed/hashed nat question

From: Simon Perreault <simon.perreault () viagenie ca>
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2013 14:32:30 +0100

Le 2013-01-23 14:22, William Herrin a écrit :

I thought this was desirable behavior for a CGN since effective port
prediction facilitates p2p nat traversal?


No. NAT traversal using port prediction is a Worst Current Practice.

Simon

Current thread:

Re: CGN fixed/hashed nat question, (continued)
- - Re: CGN fixed/hashed nat question Dobbins, Roland (Jan 22)
    - Re: CGN fixed/hashed nat question Nick Hilliard (Jan 23)
    - Re: CGN fixed/hashed nat question Sander Steffann (Jan 23)
    - Re: CGN fixed/hashed nat question Randy Bush (Jan 23)
    - Re: CGN fixed/hashed nat question Nick Hilliard (Jan 23)
    - Re: CGN fixed/hashed nat question Jean-Francois Mezei (Jan 23)
    - Re: CGN fixed/hashed nat question William Herrin (Jan 23)
    - Re: CGN fixed/hashed nat question Christian Kratzer (Jan 23)
    - Re: CGN fixed/hashed nat question William Herrin (Jan 23)
  - Re: CGN fixed/hashed nat question William Herrin (Jan 23)
    - Re: CGN fixed/hashed nat question Simon Perreault (Jan 23)
    - Re: CGN fixed/hashed nat question William Herrin (Jan 23)
    - Re: CGN fixed/hashed nat question Simon Perreault (Jan 23)
    - Re: CGN fixed/hashed nat question William Herrin (Jan 23)