Re: Big providers use NAT to squeeze little ISPs

[alan () mindvision com (Alan Hannan)]

  I see that you've no interest in defending the accusations you so
  wildly make.

  I'll go back to my life of ad-hominen attacks and mistyping of access
  lists.  At least I'm honest about it.

  -alan

> >   I will restart my question as such:
> >
> >   It is my understanding that;
> >
> >   One of your principal objections to NAT boxes is that they are
> >   motivated by technical and trade practices you find dishonest.
> >
> >   Please define and expound.
>
> My principal objection to NAT is that it breaks lots of things, including
> some servers, that customers want to put on their networks.
>
> At the PROVIDER level, especially at the level we run at, there is no NAT
> box made fast enough to do the job regardless of price.
>
> >   Do you really think that big ISP puts in /19 filters to make life
> >   hard for the "little guy" at the bottom of the "money pile"?
> >
> >   -alan
>
> As long as a provider can get their own /19 I have no problem with
> prefix filtering at the /19 level.
>
> The problem comes about when big ISPs filter at /19s *AND* the allocators 
> of space refuse to give ISPs /19s.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -