[159679] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Slashdot: UK ISP PlusNet Testing Carrier-Grade NAT Instead of IPv6
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Eric Tykwinski)
Thu Jan 17 19:45:02 2013
From: Eric Tykwinski <eric-list@truenet.com>
In-Reply-To: <50F8978C.1080707@utc.edu>
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 19:44:40 -0500
To: North American Network Operators' Group <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
I'll agree there, as developers have built in some tricks to work around NAT=
issues. But in reality doing away with NAT is a much better alternative fo=
r the long haul. So you are both right, but I'll side with Owen when doing n=
etwork deployments as to ease my future headaches.
Sent from my iPhone
On Jan 17, 2013, at 7:30 PM, Jeff Kell <jeff-kell@utc.edu> wrote:
> On 1/17/2013 6:50 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
>> Vonage will, in most cases fail through CGN as will Skype, Xbox-360,
>> and many of the other IM clients.
>=20
> Not sure about Vonage, but Skype, Xbox, and just about everything else
> imaginable (other than hosting a server) works just fine over NAT with
> default-deny inbound here, and we have several thousand students in the
> dorms that bang the heck out of those services. Most applications have
> adapted to the SOHO NATing router that is prevalent today on broadband
> internet. And if it didn't work, believe me, I'd hear about it :)
>=20
> Jeff
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
