Cheap LSN/CGN/NAT444 Solution
simon at per.reau.lt
Mon Jun 30 13:19:23 UTC 2014
Le 2014-06-30 09:05, Roland Dobbins a écrit :
> On Jun 30, 2014, at 7:42 PM, Simon Perreault <simon at per.reau.lt> wrote:
>> Why? Cause that (per-subscriber limits on ports and memory) is exactly what we recommend in RFC 6888...
> 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.
If you're saying "NAT is bad", then sure, ok, but that's besides the point.
Otherwise, then I don't know what your point is.
Oh, actually I think I get it. You're trying to sell something.
> Also, there are horizontal behaviors which are undesirable, as well.
Yeah, and let's not forget the diagonal ones either.
More information about the NANOG