[139285] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Re: v6 Avian Carriers?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Dorn Hetzel)
Fri Apr 1 13:29:44 2011
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.1104011305080.14330@whammy.cluebyfour.org>
Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2011 13:28:55 -0400
From: Dorn Hetzel <dorn@hetzel.org>
To: "Justin M. Streiner" <streiner@cluebyfour.org>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
I'm thinking both TCP and UDP, and for ICMP don't NAT's use the sequence
number field to keep them separate ?
On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 1:08 PM, Justin M. Streiner
<streiner@cluebyfour.org>wrote:
> On Fri, 1 Apr 2011, Dorn Hetzel wrote:
>
> I was thinking today would be a good day to write an RFC for "fractional
>> DHCP" where end-users can get issued say 1/64 of an v4 IP, say
>> 155.229.10.20:1024-2047. Other users on the same DSLAM, etc behind the
>> carrier NAT would have other shares of the same public IP. :)
>>
>
> Would the end-user get both the TCP and UDP ports from their assigned
> range? Also, how would you handle ICMP/ESP/etc... or would those be 'free
> with the purchase of..."?
>
> jms
>
>
