nanog mailing list archives
Re[2]: Large ISPs doing NAT?
From: Richard Welty <rwelty () averillpark net>
Date: Thu, 2 May 2002 20:03:54 -0400 (EDT)
On Thu, 2 May 2002 16:52:31 -0700 "Mansey, Jon" <Jon_Mansey () verestar com> wrote:
Why do you need a public IP to do ssh?
you don't, however, w/o a public IP, IPSec becomes difficult, sometimes impossible, to deploy -- and there are lots of folks who have or might come to have such applications, as the teething problems with IPSec gradually settle out. i just spent a week in IPSec/NAT hell working with a client who was stuck with an Ameritech DSL line. i really don't feel much like listening to songs about the joy of NAT right now (we got the application working, with no thanks due Ameritech.) richard -- Richard Welty rwelty () averillpark net Averill Park Networking 518-573-7592 Unix, Linux, IP Network Engineering, Security
Current thread:
- RE: Large ISPs doing NAT?, (continued)
- RE: Large ISPs doing NAT? Deepak Jain (May 01)
- RE: Large ISPs doing NAT? kevin graham (May 01)
- Re: Large ISPs doing NAT? John Kristoff (May 02)
- RE: Large ISPs doing NAT? Daniska Tomas (May 02)
- Re: Large ISPs doing NAT? Jake Khuon (May 02)
- Re: Large ISPs doing NAT? Valdis . Kletnieks (May 02)
- Re: Large ISPs doing NAT? Jake Khuon (May 02)
- RE: Large ISPs doing NAT? Daniska Tomas (May 02)
- RE: Large ISPs doing NAT? Peter Bierman (May 02)
- Re: Large ISPs doing NAT? Jake Khuon (May 02)
- RE: Large ISPs doing NAT? Mansey, Jon (May 02)
- Re[2]: Large ISPs doing NAT? Richard Welty (May 02)
- RE: Large ISPs doing NAT? Daniska Tomas (May 03)