[111699] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: 97.128.0.0/9 allocation to verizon wireless
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Dave Temkin)
Tue Feb 10 17:52:18 2009
Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2009 14:52:52 -0800
From: Dave Temkin <davet1@gmail.com>
To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <20090210223911.GK24542@angus.ind.WPI.EDU>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
Chuck Anderson wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 11:31:38PM +0100, Matthias Leisi wrote:
>
>> Mark Andrews schrieb:
>>
>>> I don't see any reason to complain based on those numbers.
>>> It's just a extremely high growth period due to technology
>>> change over bring in new functionality.
>>>
>> OTOH, Verizon is not the only provider of smartphone connectivity in the
>> world. Most of them try to be "good citizens" and do not waste a scarce
>> resource (IPv4 space).
>>
>
> I disagree that using global IPv4 space is a "waste". Every device
> deserves to have "real" internet connectivity and not this NAT crap.
>
>
Why must it be always "real" versus NAT? 99% of users don't care one
way or another. Would it be so hard for the carrier to provide a switch
between NAT and "real" IP if the user needs or wants it?
