nanog mailing list archives
RE: Quantifying the customer support and impact of cgnat for residential ipv4
From: <aaron1 () gvtc com>
Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2021 22:10:02 -0600
I have >50,000 subscribers behind CGNat. I would have to find out from the assigners group, the rate at which static/public IP address sales increased during our CGNat deployment over the last few years. I do understand that we had an up-tick in public IP sales, but unsure of the rate at which it occurred… actually I may have to get in contact with the sales group for a question like that. About problems (BTW, we use Juniper MX platform with service mic/mpc) … we had some significant issues initially… but things like… * Tuning the IGP to route to the closest CGNat boundary node, consistently * AMS interface source-ip load balancing * APP * EIM * EIF …help greatly in fixing issue with authentication on websites (webmail, banking) and also, vpn issues, and issues with gaming consoles, were largely resolved with those aforementioned enhancements -Aaron
Current thread:
- Quantifying the customer support and impact of cgnat for residential ipv4 Eric Kuhnke (Nov 21)
- RE: Quantifying the customer support and impact of cgnat for residential ipv4 Travis Garrison (Nov 21)
- RE: Quantifying the customer support and impact of cgnat for residential ipv4 Graham Johnston (Nov 22)
- RE: Quantifying the customer support and impact of cgnat for residential ipv4 aaron1 (Nov 21)
- RE: Quantifying the customer support and impact of cgnat for residential ipv4 Travis Garrison (Nov 21)