[137172] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Looking for an IPv6 naysayer...
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (TR Shaw)
Wed Feb 9 18:50:24 2011
From: TR Shaw <tshaw@oitc.com>
In-Reply-To: <EE162CA9-4284-4F32-9DEE-3D210E615AEC@delong.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2011 18:48:39 -0500
To: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>,
North American Network Operators Group <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Feb 9, 2011, at 6:21 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
>=20
> On Feb 9, 2011, at 12:50 PM, George Bonser wrote:
>=20
>>>=20
>>> I never thought it was that bad. In some 3G/wireless networks in
>>> Germany
>>> the providers use NAT and transparent HTTP-proxy. But this is only
>>> wireless. I'm not aware of any DSL or Cable provider NATing their
>>> customers.
>>>=20
>>> Jens
>>=20
>> Practically all broadband providers NAT their customers in the US. =
If
>> you look at the largest ones which are probably Comcast, Verizon, and
>> AT&T, you have the majority of US broadband subscribers right there.
>>=20
>>=20
> No.
>=20
> Almost none of the broadband providers in the US NAT their customers.
>=20
> Most of them provide a single public IP address to their residential
> customers.
>=20
> Most broadband customers use their own NAT to extend that single
> public IP address from the provider to multiple addresses within
> the site.
>=20
> This is a very very different thing from LSN with a lot less breakage.
Owen
This maybe true of all the big boys but I can tell you that rural telcos =
providing internet connectivity (personal experience in Northern MN) do =
and heavily. They may run fiber to the house but they do LSN big time.
Tom
