[154218] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: technical contact at ATT Wireless
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Christopher Morrow)
Thu Jun 28 16:51:54 2012
In-Reply-To: <CAJAdsDnwpHEJSHnZyG7XLegeT3RdR6n=J-P=U8Cv1N7jv-edqQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2012 16:50:47 -0400
From: Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists@gmail.com>
To: PC <paul4004@gmail.com>
Cc: NANOG <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 4:20 PM, PC <paul4004@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm sure they use carrier grade NAT, yes.
I'm sure it's not 'carrier grade', but it does play one on tv...
> However, nothing would prevent them from using a unique public IP assigned
> to them for their DNS servers like others do.
sure. they could do lots of things.
> Using RFC1918 space for a routed destination of an ISP service (DNS) is
> particularly problematic for many VPN client configurations with corporate
> address range overlap.
of course, but you aren't supposed to be doing that on their network
anyway... so says the nice man from sprint 4 nanogs ago.
-chris
(yes, I realize that people use the 'wireless' network for all manner
of things that the 'wireless carriers' are not always happy about, but
hell, they do give out 'internet protocol' connections, they ought to
expect people to 'use' them, eh?)
