[159691] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Slashdot: UK ISP PlusNet Testing Carrier-Grade NAT Instead of IPv6
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Owen DeLong)
Fri Jan 18 01:52:33 2013
In-Reply-To: <CALcVfM0j-vsiCNae4YjLR7t7PB1cXvyLJmBBwVcTZdcF0QtVLg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 20:49:11 -1000
To: james jones <james.voip@gmail.com>
Cc: North American Network Operators' Group <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
>=20
> I hate to break it to you guys more of the larger providers in NA are impl=
ementing CGNAT in the next 6 to 18 months. Especially the mobile carriers.
I have agreed long ago that mobile is the one place where CGN will go mostly=
unnoticed. First of all, most mobiles have been behind some form of CGN for=
a long time. Second, hardly anyone expects real internet access through the=
ir mobile in NA to actually be fully functional to begin with. It's always b=
een somewhat broken and everyone is used to that. Breaking it a little bit m=
ore will probably make no difference whatsoever.
I can already count on VZW to disable, block, or degrade to uselessness any a=
ttempt at a VOIP call or VIDEO conference other than through the built-in ap=
plications where the phone manufacturer and the carrier have come to some ag=
reement and built in hooks to make it sort of work. I can also count on VZW t=
o do nasty things to my DNS requests (ever try turning on DNSSEC validation o=
n a handset? I don't recommend it.)
When I was on SPRINT, they were slightly worse. On my iPAD via AT&T, it's mu=
ch worse.
Mobile carriers in North America are an ever increasing quagmire where one h=
as to attempt to locate the one that sucks least for the duration of your ne=
xt contract.
Let's focus more on CGN via CMTS, GPON, or DSL system. That's where the real=
pain will be felt by the subscribers.
Owen=
