nanog mailing list archives
Re: CGNAT Solutions
From: William Herrin <bill () herrin us>
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2020 13:53:25 -0700
On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 12:12 PM John Alcock <john () alcock org> wrote:
I run a small ISP in Tennessee. I am starting to run low on IP's and need to consider CGNAT.
Hi John, How small is small? Up to a certain size regular NAT with enough logging to trace back abusers will tend to work fine. if we're talking single-digit gbps, it may not be worth the effort to consider the wonderful world of CGNAT. Regards, Bill Herrin -- William Herrin bill () herrin us https://bill.herrin.us/
Current thread:
- CGNAT Solutions John Alcock (Apr 28)
- Re: CGNAT Solutions Baldur Norddahl (Apr 28)
- RE: CGNAT Solutions Aaron Gould (Apr 28)
- Re: CGNAT Solutions William Herrin (Apr 28)
- Re: CGNAT Solutions Brandon Martin (Apr 28)
- Re: CGNAT Solutions Masataka Ohta (Apr 28)
- Re: CGNAT Solutions Brandon Martin (Apr 29)
- Re: CGNAT Solutions Masataka Ohta (Apr 29)
- Re: CGNAT Solutions Ca By (Apr 29)
- Re: CGNAT Solutions William Herrin (Apr 29)
- Message not available
- Re: CGNAT Solutions William Herrin (Apr 29)
- Re: CGNAT Solutions Brandon Martin (Apr 29)
- Re: CGNAT Solutions Ca By (Apr 29)
- Re: CGNAT Solutions JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG (Apr 29)
- Re: CGNAT Solutions Brandon Martin (Apr 28)