RE: OpenDNS CGNAT Issues

[Kenny Taylor <kenny.taylor () kccd edu>]

For a truckload of gold, I’m pretty sure most of us would make that work ☺

Kenny

From: NANOG <nanog-bounces+kenny.taylor=kccd.edu () nanog org> On Behalf Of Owen DeLong
Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2018 10:04 PM
To: Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists () gmail com>
Cc: nanog list <nanog () nanog org>
Subject: Re: OpenDNS CGNAT Issues




On Sep 11, 2018, at 21:58 , Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists () gmail com<mailto:morrowc.lists () gmail com>> wrote:


On Tue, Sep 11, 2018 at 9:06 PM Jerry Cloe <jerry () jtcloe net<mailto:jerry () jtcloe net>> wrote:
OpenDNS, or anyone for that matter, should never see 100.64/10 ip's. If they do, something is wrong at the source, and 
OpenDNS wouldn't be able to reply anyway (or at least have the reply route back to the user).

maybeopendns peers directly with such an eyeball network? and in that case maybe they have an agreement to accept 
traffic from the 100.64 space?

They’d only be able to do one such agreement per routing environment.

Managing that would be _UGLY_ for the first one and __UGLY__ at scale for anything more than one.

It also pretty much eliminates potential for geographic diversity and anycast for a provider in a local geography.

Certainly not something I’d choose to do if I were OpenDNS unless someone arrived with a very large truck full of gold, 
diamonds, or other valuable hard assets.

Owen