nanog mailing list archives
Re: Where NAT disenfranchises the end-user ...
From: Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu
Date: Fri, 07 Sep 2001 14:02:57 -0400
On Fri, 07 Sep 2001 10:26:02 PDT, Jon Mansey <jon_mansey () verestar com> said:
All the previous times this discussion has arisen here, I have concluded that "real" IPs should only be owned and used by folks with clue, everyone else gets a NATed IP. Discuss.
There are those who would argue that you just disenfranchised every user that connects via <insert list of top 10 access providers here>. On the other hand, you *DID* just solve the address space problem - since we know that the majority of dialup users are clueless, and the majority of .com's are lame too, the average ISP should be able to get by with just 10 or 15 IP addresses and NAT everybody behind those. That's like saying "You're only allowed to direct-dial your phone if you know how many volts are between the red and green wires, and what it's there for - everybody else has to ask the operator for assistance". Cross out "operator" and put in "NAT", and that's your proposal..... -- Valdis Kletnieks Operating Systems Analyst Virginia Tech
Attachment:
_bin
Description:
Current thread:
- RE: Where NAT disenfranchises the end-user ..., (continued)
- RE: Where NAT disenfranchises the end-user ... Roeland Meyer (Sep 06)
- Re: Where NAT disenfranchises the end-user ... Josh Richards (Sep 06)
- Re: Where NAT disenfranchises the end-user ... Jeff Mcadams (Sep 06)
- Re: Where NAT disenfranchises the end-user ... David Howe (Sep 07)
- RE: Where NAT disenfranchises the end-user ... Roeland Meyer (Sep 06)
- RE: Where NAT disenfranchises the end-user ... Roeland Meyer (Sep 06)
- RE: Where NAT disenfranchises the end-user ... Charles Sprickman (Sep 07)
- Re: Where NAT disenfranchises the end-user ... bmanning (Sep 07)
- Re: Where NAT disenfranchises the end-user ... Jon Mansey (Sep 07)
- Re: Where NAT disenfranchises the end-user ... bmanning (Sep 07)
- Re: Where NAT disenfranchises the end-user ... Valdis . Kletnieks (Sep 07)
- Re: Where NAT disenfranchises the end-user ... Scott Francis (Sep 07)
- RE: Where NAT disenfranchises the end-user ... Charles Sprickman (Sep 07)
- end2end? (was: RE: Where NAT disenfranchises the end-user ...) Mike Batchelor (Sep 07)
- Re: end2end? (was: RE: Where NAT disenfranchises the end-user ...) Joel Jaeggli (Sep 07)
- Re: end2end? (was: RE: Where NAT disenfranchises the end-user ...) Jon Mansey (Sep 07)
- Re[3]: Where NAT disenfranchises the end-user ...) Richard Welty (Sep 07)
- RE: Where NAT disenfranchises the end-user ... Roeland Meyer (Sep 06)
- Re: end2end? (was: RE: Where NAT disenfranchises the end-user ...) Leo Bicknell (Sep 07)
- RE: end2end? (was: RE: Where NAT disenfranchises the end-user ...) Mike Batchelor (Sep 07)
- Re: end2end? (was: RE: Where NAT disenfranchises the end-user ...) Joel Baker (Sep 07)
- Re: end2end? (was: RE: Where NAT disenfranchises the end-user ...) Leo Bicknell (Sep 07)
- Re: end2end? (was: RE: Where NAT disenfranchises the end-user ...) Andy Dills (Sep 07)