Fwd: SlashDot: "Comcast Gunning for NAT Users"
Martin J. Levy
mahtin at mahtin.com
Thu Jan 31 15:57:38 UTC 2002
I got this forwarded to me. I'm not impressed.
Based upon the general desire for providers to have NAT'ed users and to reduce IP-space usage where appropriate, does this make sense? I can understand the providers desire to increase revenue, but I don't believe this is a good way to do it.
Besides the technical difficulties of detecting a household that is running a NAT'ed router, why not win over the customer with a low-cost extra IP address vs: the customers one-time hardware cost for the router. There are people who would be willing to pay some amount monthly vs: (let's say) $100 for a NAT box.
Does anyone know what percentage of home broadband users run NAT? Does anyone have stats for IP-addresses saved by using NAT?
------ Forwarded Message
From: Ward Clark <ward at joyofmacs.com>
Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 15:00:32 -0500
To: "NetTalk" <nettalk at sustworks.com>
Subject: SlashDot: "Comcast Gunning for NAT Users"
Today's MacInTouch links to a report that appeared in SlashDot on
"A co-worker of mine resigned today. His new job at Comcast: Hunting down
'abusers' of the service. More specifically, anyone using NAT to connect
more than one computer to their cable modem to get Internet access-
whether or not you're running servers or violating any other Acceptable
Use Policies. Comcast has an entire department dedicated to eradicating
NAT users from their network. ... did anyone think they'd already be
harassing people that are using nothing more than the bandwidth for which
they are paying? ..." Earthlink and Comcast have both been advertising
lately their single-household, multi-computer services (and additional
fees) -- probably amusing to many thousands of broadband-router owners,
at least until the cable companies really crack down.
There's a huge number of responses (691 at the moment), which I quickly
scanned out of curiosity. I'm not a Comcast or Earthlink user.
You can start here:
To unsubscribe <mailto:requests at sustworks.com> with message body
------ End of Forwarded Message
More information about the NANOG