nanog mailing list archives
Re: NAT444 or ?
From: Cameron Byrne <cb.list6 () gmail com>
Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2011 08:30:51 -0700
On Sep 11, 2011 4:33 AM, "Dobbins, Roland" <rdobbins () arbor net> wrote:
On Sep 11, 2011, at 4:02 PM, Leigh Porter wrote:I'd agree that, usually, distributed is better but these are not
distributed networks, there is a single point (or a few large single points) of contact.
The point is that these aggregations of state are quite vulnerable, and
therefore they should be as distributed as is practicable.
I don't disagree with that principle, but other priciples around scale, cost, and oam say that we get one big box called a cgn. And, that is the reality of service provider nat in the real world today. For mobile providers, the cgn generally follows the mobility anchor points. For some national providers that means nfl cities, for others that means one per timezone. Cb
----------------------------------------------------------------------- Roland Dobbins <rdobbins () arbor net> // <http://www.arbornetworks.com> The basis of optimism is sheer terror. -- Oscar Wilde
Current thread:
- RE: NAT444 or ?, (continued)
- RE: NAT444 or ? Leigh Porter (Sep 08)
- Re: NAT444 or ? Mark Tinka (Sep 09)
- RE: NAT444 or ? Dan Wing (Sep 08)
- Re: NAT444 or ? Mark Tinka (Sep 09)
- Re: NAT444 or ? Dobbins, Roland (Sep 09)
- Re: NAT444 or ? Mark Tinka (Sep 09)
- Re: NAT444 or ? Dobbins, Roland (Sep 09)
- Re: NAT444 or ? Cameron Byrne (Sep 10)
- RE: NAT444 or ? Leigh Porter (Sep 11)
- Re: NAT444 or ? Dobbins, Roland (Sep 11)
- Re: NAT444 or ? Cameron Byrne (Sep 11)
- RE: NAT444 or ? Dan Wing (Sep 08)
- Re: NAT444 or ? Jean-Francois . TremblayING (Sep 07)
- Re: NAT444 or ? Daniel Roesen (Sep 07)
- Re: NAT444 or ? Seth Mos (Sep 07)
- RE: NAT444 or ? Leigh Porter (Sep 07)
- Re: NAT444 or ? Dorn Hetzel (Sep 07)
- Re: NAT444 or ? Valdis . Kletnieks (Sep 07)
- RE: NAT444 or ? Leigh Porter (Sep 07)
- Re: NAT444 or ? Owen DeLong (Sep 07)
- RE: NAT444 or ? Leigh Porter (Sep 08)