[45373] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: SlashDot: "Comcast Gunning for NAT Users"
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Matt Barrette)
Thu Jan 31 17:44:55 2002
Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.20020131163435.017e1610@pop3.netins.net>
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 16:34:35 -0600
To: nanog@merit.edu
From: Matt Barrette <mattbar@netins.net>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSI.4.05L.10201311330150.4456-100000@gumby.citytel.ne
t>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
To add more fuel to the fire, how does one combat the issue of "stolen" IP
addresses. Stolen IP's are worse to me than a user doing NAT.
Slightly intuitive users could figure out that their IP is one of a /24 and
just statically assign one to their other machine with out paying for it,
and worse take somebodies IP and make that user non-functional. I know the
cable modem service where I live will allow this type of activity.
At 01:37 PM 1/31/2002 -0800, Keith Woodworth wrote:
>
>
>
>On Thu, 31 Jan 2002, Dan Hollis wrote:
>
>|+On Thu, 31 Jan 2002, Marc Pierrat wrote:
>|+> It's not very enforceable, so I'd be very surprised to see much money
>|+> spent on this witch hunt.
>|+
>|+At least one provider has a fully staffed full time "anti-nat" divison
>|+now. But will they burn more cash in the nat witch-hunt than they save?
>|+
>|+I also wonder about false positives. Watch the lawsuits fly as they
>|+mistakenly cutoff non-nat customers.
>
>From a technical standpoint how does one detect NAT users over the
>network?
>
>Keith
>
>
____
Matt Barrette
NetINS
Network Technician
Email: mattbar@netins.net
www.netins.net
www.netins.com
PH: 888-NETINS1
