[180458] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: AWS Elastic IP architecture
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Rafael Possamai)
Wed Jun 3 16:32:42 2015
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <CAL9jLaZneSzEB0TefS66wdpkCs8Pm9eREWo70pqQQ-h1hEhrAQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Rafael Possamai <rafael@gav.ufsc.br>
Date: Wed, 3 Jun 2015 15:32:17 -0500
Cc: nanog list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
we are starting to waste packets arguing over some private intellectual
property
On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 3:24 PM, Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists@gmail.com=
>
wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 7:56 AM, Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com> wrote:
> > For example, let=E2=80=99s say you have 20 machines for whom you want t=
o allow
> inbound SSH access. In the IPv4 world, with NAT, you have to configure an
> individual port mapping for each machine and you have to either configure
> all of the SSH clients, or, specify the particular port for the machine y=
ou
> want to get to on the command line.
>
> in the original case in question the fact that there's nat happeng
> isn't material... so all of this discussion of NAT is a red herring,
> right? the user of AWS services cares not that 'nat is happening',
> because they can simply RESTful up a VM instance and ssh into it in
> ~30 seconds, no config required.
>
> let's skip all NAT discussions on this topic from here on out, yes?
>
