nanog mailing list archives
Re: Cheap LSN/CGN/NAT444 Solution
From: Roland Dobbins <rdobbins () arbor net>
Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2014 20:05:58 +0700
On Jun 30, 2014, at 7:42 PM, Simon Perreault <simon () per reau lt> wrote:
Why? Cause that (per-subscriber limits on ports and memory) is exactly what we recommend in RFC 6888...
<https://app.box.com/s/a3oqqlgwe15j8svojvzl> I can't tell you how many times I've received frantic 4AM calls about NATted wireless networks going down due to this sort of thing. It's a real problem. Also, there are horizontal behaviors which are undesirable, as well. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Roland Dobbins <rdobbins () arbor net> // <http://www.arbornetworks.com> Equo ne credite, Teucri. -- Laocoön
Current thread:
- Cheap LSN/CGN/NAT444 Solution Skeeve Stevens (Jun 29)
- Re: Cheap LSN/CGN/NAT444 Solution Robert Drake (Jun 29)
- Re: Cheap LSN/CGN/NAT444 Solution Roland Dobbins (Jun 30)
- RE: Cheap LSN/CGN/NAT444 Solution Tony Wicks (Jun 30)
- Re: Cheap LSN/CGN/NAT444 Solution Roland Dobbins (Jun 30)
- Re: Cheap LSN/CGN/NAT444 Solution Simon Perreault (Jun 30)
- Re: Cheap LSN/CGN/NAT444 Solution Roland Dobbins (Jun 30)
- Re: Cheap LSN/CGN/NAT444 Solution Simon Perreault (Jun 30)
- Re: Cheap LSN/CGN/NAT444 Solution Roland Dobbins (Jun 30)
- Re: Cheap LSN/CGN/NAT444 Solution Roland Dobbins (Jun 30)
- Re: Cheap LSN/CGN/NAT444 Solution Robert Drake (Jun 29)
- Re: Cheap LSN/CGN/NAT444 Solution Stepan Kucherenko (Jun 30)
- RE: Cheap LSN/CGN/NAT444 Solution Tony Wicks (Jun 30)
- Re: Cheap LSN/CGN/NAT444 Solution Mark Andrews (Jun 30)