Re: PlayStationNetwork blocking of CGNAT public addresses

[Alexander Maassen <outsider () scarynet org>]

Ipv6 is there for 20+ years, cgnat is needed coz the net grows kinda exponentially due to stuff like IoT/mobiles/m2m, 
and isp's need to provide users with the ability to talk ipv4 simply because the other side refuses to deploy v6 
abilities. Do the math if they really care.
Also the servers itself hosting the gameserver probably already are dual stacked. But the gamecode itself misses the 
support.
Then there is the issue of you as isp not being able or daring to show a fist and simply saying: screw you. Because you 
are risking to loose customers.
And as long as the company's earn plenty of money using outdated code, they won't change it, coz that would imply 
spending money that won't flow into fancy buildings, fast cars and all that other useless luxury.




Kind regards,
Alexander Maassen
- Technical Maintenance Engineer Parkstad Support BV- Maintainer DroneBL- Peplink Certified Engineer

-------- Oorspronkelijk bericht --------Van: Mike Hammett <nanog () ics-il net> Datum: 22-09-16  13:23  (GMT+01:00) 
Aan: Alexander Maassen <outsider () scarynet org> Cc: NANOG <nanog () nanog org> Onderwerp: Re: PlayStationNetwork 
blocking of CGNAT public addresses 
If you told them they would have fewer NAT issues if they supported IPv6, they'd start to care.  ;-) They know enough 
to hate NAT.



-----
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions

Midwest Internet Exchange

The Brothers WISP

From: "Alexander Maassen" <outsider () scarynet org>
Cc: "NANOG" <nanog () nanog org>
Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2016 3:35:01 AM
Subject: Re: PlayStationNetwork blocking of CGNAT public addresses

Both gamers and content providers do not care. The gamers as they only care about the game itself and don't care about 
the technical mumbo jumbo. And the makers coz they only care about making money by producing content the gamers want. 
And you service providers are left with the headache of attempts to please both sides.
If this wasn't the case, then why after 20 years, ipv6 ain't rolled out.
Hence again I'd be voting for an ipv6 only day, but that will never happen.....
Kind regards,
Alexander Maassen
- Technical Maintenance Engineer Parkstad Support BV- Maintainer DroneBL- Peplink Certified Engineer

-------- Oorspronkelijk bericht --------Van: Mark Andrews <marka () isc org> Datum: 21-09-16  03:29  (GMT+01:00) Aan: 
Justin Wilson <lists () mtin net> Cc: NANOG <nanog () nanog org> Onderwerp: Re: PlayStationNetwork blocking of CGNAT 
public addresses 

In message <09342130-874F-4FA4-B410-B7B66A75FA4D () mtin net>, Justin Wilson write
s:
> PSN is one reason I am not a fan of CGNAT. All they see are tons of
> connections from the same IP.  This results in them banning folks.  Due
> to them being hacked so many times getting them to actually communicate
> is almost impossible.  My .02 is just get the gamers a true public if at
> all possible.
>
> Justin Wilson
> j2sw () mtin net

What we need is business tech reporters to continually report on
these failures of content providers to deliver their services over
IPv6.  20 years lead time should be enough for any service.

Mark
-- 
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742                 INTERNET: marka () isc org