On Apr 20, 2010, at 7:53 AM, John Levine wrote: >> But regardless of what it is called people usually know what they >> signed up for and when what has worked for the 5-6 years suddenly >> breaks ... > > If a consumer ISP moved its customers from separate IPs to NAT, what > do you think would break? I'm the guy who was behind a double NAT for > several months without realizing it, and I can report that the only > symptom I noticed was incoming call flakiness on one of my VoIP > phones, and even that was easy to fix by decreasing the registration > interval. The other VoIP phone worked fine in its default config. > Did you use Yahoo IM, AIM, or Skype? Did you use any of those for Video Chat and/or to transfer files?
Did you do any peer to peer filesharing? Did you play any MMOs? Did you run any services? > Other than the .01% of consumer customers who are mega multiplayer > game weenies, what's not going to work? Actual experience as opposed > to hypothetical hand waving would be preferable. > I hate to break it to you, but they are not 0.1%, they are more like 15%. When you add in the other things that break which I have outlined above, you start to approach 75%. I would argue that 75% is a significant and meaningful fraction of an ISPs customer base. > I'm not saying that NAT is wonderful, but my experience, in which day > to day stuff all works fine, is utterly different from the doom and > disaster routinely predicted here. > Perhaps your day to day is different from others. Perhaps people here generally think in terms of servicing all of their customers. Perhaps in many cases if just 1% of our customers are on the phone with our technical support department, we are losing money. YMMV. Owen