> On Apr 4, 2022, at 05:06 , Joe Maimon <jmai...@jmaimon.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG wrote:
>> No, isn't only a Sony problem, becomes a problem for every ISP that has
>> customers using Sony PSN and have CGN (NAT444), their IP blocks are
>> black-listed when they are detected as used CGN. This blocking is "forever"
>> (I'm not aware of anyone that has been able to convince PSN to unblock
>> them). Then the ISP will rotate the addresses that are in the CGN (which
>> means some work renumbering other parts of the network).
>>
>> You do this with all your IPv4 blocks, and at some point, you don't have any
>> "not black-listed" block. Then you need to transfer more addresses.
>>
>> So realistically, in many cases, for residential ISPs it makes a lot of
>> sense to analyze if you have a relevant number of customers using PSN and
>> make your numbers about if it makes sense or not to buy CGN vs transfer IPv4
>> addresses vs the real long term solution, which is IPv6 even if you need to
>> invest in replacing the customer CPEs.
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>> Jordi
>> @jordipalet
>>
>
> I would expect the trend to become that ISP's refuse to accommodate 3rd party
> vendors shenanigans to the point where it hampers their operations or to the
> point where it cost them more to do so.
$ISP_1 refuses to accommodate Sony’s shenanigans…
Three possible outcomes:
1. $ISP_1 has competition. Customer blames $ISP_1 for
network problem and customer to competitor
that does.
2. $ISP_1 has no competition. Customer blames $ISP_1
and keeps making expensive support calls
to $ISP_1 making $ISP_1 wish customer would
bother (nonexistent) competitor.
3. $ISP_1 has competition. Competition also refuses to
accommodate Sony’s shenanigans.
Whichever $ISP customer is using this week
continues to get support calls complaining about
network issue. Sony continues to tell customer
problem is with $ISP. $ISP continues to tell
customer problem is with Sony. Lather, rinse,
repeat.
All of this, of course, becomes an effective non-issue if both $ISP and Sony
deploy IPv6 and get rid of the stupid NAT tricks.
Owen
>
> Likely, they would sooner tell the customer that their vendor (whom they pay
> money) is blocking the ISP and that there must a) deal with their vendor
> and/or b) pay/use a dedicated static IP
>
> Because as you point out, its impossible to support this trend after a
> certain point, and really, why should you?
>
> With enough of that attitude, the trend reverses and vendors will have to
> start using other mechanisms, perhaps even ones where cooperation with the SP
> is a possibility.
>
> Joe
