Fwd: SlashDot: "Comcast Gunning for NAT Users"

Thu Jan 31 17:03:24 UTC 2002

On Thu, 31 Jan 2002 07:57:38 PST, "Martin J. Levy" <mahtin at mahtin.com>  said:

> 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.

Which do you resemble more?  Dilbert, or his pointy-haired boss?

Which does the person who made this business decision resemble more?

Yes, it sounds like a dumb idea, if it's true (which I haven't seen supported
yet).
-- 
				Valdis Kletnieks
				Computer Systems Senior Engineer
				Virginia Tech

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 226 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20020131/2fed009f/attachment.sig>