nanog mailing list archives
RE: CGNAT scaling cost (was Re: V6 still not supported)
From: Vasilenko Eduard via NANOG <nanog () nanog org>
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2022 10:59:00 +0000
No. I have already forgotten that SDH did exist (and yes, I remember X.25 - I have operated X.25 network). I was talking in the next message about 100GE. In fact, the situation would be similar for 10E too. Ed/ -----Original Message----- From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-bounces+vasilenko.eduard=huawei.com () nanog org] On Behalf Of Masataka Ohta Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2022 3:56 AM To: nanog () nanog org Subject: Re: CGNAT scaling cost (was Re: V6 still not supported) Vasilenko Eduard via NANOG wrote:
CGNAT cost was very close to 3x compared to routers of the same performance.
That should be because you are comparing cost of carrier, that is telco, grade NAT and consumer grade routers. Remember the cost of carrier grade datalink of SONET/SDH. Masataka Ohta
Current thread:
- CGNAT scaling cost (was Re: V6 still not supported) Jared Brown (Mar 30)
- RE: CGNAT scaling cost (was Re: V6 still not supported) Vasilenko Eduard via NANOG (Mar 30)
- Re: RE: CGNAT scaling cost (was V6 still not supported) Jared Brown (Mar 30)
- RE: RE: CGNAT scaling cost (was V6 still not supported) Vasilenko Eduard via NANOG (Mar 30)
- Re: CGNAT scaling cost (was Re: V6 still not supported) Masataka Ohta (Mar 30)
- RE: CGNAT scaling cost (was Re: V6 still not supported) Vasilenko Eduard via NANOG (Mar 31)
- Re: RE: CGNAT scaling cost (was V6 still not supported) Jared Brown (Mar 30)
- RE: CGNAT scaling cost (was Re: V6 still not supported) Vasilenko Eduard via NANOG (Mar 30)