[47378] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re[2]: Large ISPs doing NAT?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Richard Welty)
Thu May 2 20:07:48 2002
Date: Thu, 2 May 2002 20:03:54 -0400 (EDT)
From: Richard Welty <rwelty@averillpark.net>
To: nanog@merit.edu
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Content-Disposition: INLINE
In-Reply-To: <43CAA8BAF8A21049B3ABF1A70AED597532EE9B@laxexg01.la.interpacket.net>
Message-Id: <E173QYE-00045L-00@skipper.averillpark.net>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
On Thu, 2 May 2002 16:52:31 -0700 "Mansey, Jon" <Jon_Mansey@verestar.com> wrote:
> Why do you need a public IP to do ssh?
you don't, however, w/o a public IP, IPSec becomes difficult, sometimes
impossible, to deploy -- and there are lots of folks who have or might come
to have such applications, as the teething problems with IPSec gradually
settle out.
i just spent a week in IPSec/NAT hell working with a client who was stuck
with an Ameritech DSL line. i really don't feel much like listening to
songs about the joy of NAT right now (we got the application working, with
no thanks due Ameritech.)
richard
--
Richard Welty rwelty@averillpark.net
Averill Park Networking 518-573-7592
Unix, Linux, IP Network Engineering, Security
