nanog mailing list archives
Re: CGNAT Solutions
From: Masataka Ohta <mohta () necom830 hpcl titech ac jp>
Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2020 11:46:50 +0900
Ca By wrote:
You can't eliminate that unless the CPE also knows what internal port range it's mapped to so that it restricts what range it uses. If you can do that, you can get rid of the programmatic state tracking entirely and just use static translations for TCP and UDP which, while nice, is impractical. You're about 95% of the way to LW4o6 or MAP at that point.Interesting. Then, if you can LW4o6 or MAP, you are about 95% of the way to E2ENAT with complete end to end transparency using IPv4 only, which means we don't need IPv6 with 4to6 NAT lacking the transparency. https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ohta-e2e-nat-00 Masataka Ohta
Since we are talking numbers ans hard facts
I'm rather interested in not numbers but facts on the E2E transparency, because, without the transparency, legacy NAT44 should be enough. But, as you insist on numbers:
42% of usa accesses google on ipv6 https://www.google.com/intl/en/ipv6/statistics.html
The proper number to be considered should be percentage of IPv6 hosts which can not communicate with IPv4 only hosts. Isn't it 0%? Masataka Ohta
Current thread:
- Re: CGNAT Solutions, (continued)
- Re: CGNAT Solutions Brandon Martin (Apr 28)
- Re: CGNAT Solutions Masataka Ohta (Apr 28)
- Re: CGNAT Solutions Brandon Martin (Apr 29)
- Re: CGNAT Solutions Masataka Ohta (Apr 29)
- Re: CGNAT Solutions Ca By (Apr 29)
- Re: CGNAT Solutions William Herrin (Apr 29)
- Message not available
- Re: CGNAT Solutions William Herrin (Apr 29)
- Re: CGNAT Solutions Brandon Martin (Apr 29)
- Re: CGNAT Solutions Ca By (Apr 29)
- Re: CGNAT Solutions JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG (Apr 29)
- Re: CGNAT Solutions Brandon Martin (Apr 28)
- Re: CGNAT Solutions Masataka Ohta (Apr 29)
- Re: CGNAT Solutions Ca By (Apr 29)
- Re: CGNAT Solutions Masataka Ohta (Apr 30)
- Re: CGNAT Solutions Robert Blayzor (Apr 29)
- Re: CGNAT Solutions Tarko Tikan (Apr 29)
- Re: CGNAT Solutions james jones (Apr 29)
- Re: CGNAT Solutions Mikael Abrahamsson via NANOG (Apr 29)
- Re: CGNAT Solutions Robert Blayzor (Apr 29)
- Re: CGNAT Solutions Mikael Abrahamsson via NANOG (Apr 29)
- RE: CGNAT Solutions Aaron Gould (Apr 29)