[162272] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Verizon DSL moving to CGN
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Mikael Abrahamsson)
Mon Apr 8 06:01:40 2013
Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2013 12:01:24 +0200 (CEST)
From: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>
To: "Rajiv Asati (rajiva)" <rajiva@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <8BEC0BF0-D130-46F6-8C2E-A5E982588555@cisco.com>
Cc: nanog list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Mon, 8 Apr 2013, Rajiv Asati (rajiva) wrote:
> Thankfully, MAP is not CGN. Correctly stated, unlike DS-Lite, MAP
> doesn't require any CGN that causes the SP network to put up with the
> NAT state. This means that all the subsequent issues of CGN/DS-Lite no
> longer apply.
For me as an operator, MAP is most likely going to be implemented in a
CGN-like box. Yes, it's stateless. Doesn't matter, I still need to flow
traffic through a dedicated box because MAP won't be implemented in my
regular routers (if you know otherwise, please speak up).
> MAP is all about stateless (NAT64 of Encapsulation) and IPv6 enabled
> access. MAP makes much more sense in any SP network having its internet
> customers do IPv4 address sharing and embrace IPv6.
It's still NAT.
--
Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike@swm.pp.se
