Big providers use NAT to squeeze little ISPs
Alan Hannan
alan at mindvision.com
Thu Feb 27 02:17:56 UTC 1997
I see that you've no interest in defending the accusations you so
wildly make.
I'll go back to my life of ad-hominen attacks and mistyping of access
lists. At least I'm honest about it.
-alan
>
> > I will restart my question as such:
> >
> > It is my understanding that;
> >
> > One of your principal objections to NAT boxes is that they are
> > motivated by technical and trade practices you find dishonest.
> >
> > Please define and expound.
>
> My principal objection to NAT is that it breaks lots of things, including
> some servers, that customers want to put on their networks.
>
> At the PROVIDER level, especially at the level we run at, there is no NAT
> box made fast enough to do the job regardless of price.
>
> > Do you really think that big ISP puts in /19 filters to make life
> > hard for the "little guy" at the bottom of the "money pile"?
> >
> > -alan
>
> As long as a provider can get their own /19 I have no problem with
> prefix filtering at the /19 level.
>
> The problem comes about when big ISPs filter at /19s *AND* the allocators
> of space refuse to give ISPs /19s.
>
More information about the NANOG
mailing list