Dear All,
Anybody here who work for ISP that use NATed/PATed address for their
clients? Is it appropriate for ISP to use NAT/PAT?
Thanks
Reden
___
UPDATED Posting Guidelines: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info:
that..
Regards,
Julius
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 07 June 2000 09:24
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: NAT for ISPs
Dear All,
Anybody here who work for ISP that use NATed/PATed address for their
clients
I am a newbie
I would hazard a guess that, for an ISP(assuming thousands of users) to do
address translation would be a large technical feat, consuming more Hardware
and other resources than the savings on registered IP addresses could
justify
Please correct me if I am wrong
Tayta
<[EMAIL PROTE
Current IP address allocation from ARIN assumes that ISPs will use
private addressing and NAT for single-homed customers. They are
reasonable about exceptions, such as protocols that won't work
through NAT, but the exceptions need to be justified for the ISP to
continue getting address space.
ers. Does
this sound familiar to you?
Irwin
-Original Message-
From: Howard C. Berkowitz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, June 07, 2000 12:04 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: NAT for ISPs
Current IP address allocation from ARIN assumes that ISPs will use
private addressi
On Oct 28, 6:40am, "Howard C. Berkowitz" wrote:
}
} Current IP address allocation from ARIN assumes that ISPs will use
} private addressing and NAT for single-homed customers. They are
} reasonable about exceptions, such as protocols that won't work
} through NAT, but the exceptions need to b
t present, the ARIN assumption is
that 7 percent of cable customers will use IP service. ARIN will
grant more than 7 percent if usage can be documented.
>
>-Original Message-
>From: Howard C. Berkowitz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>Sent: Wednesday, June 07, 2000 12:04 PM
>
On the subject of IP adressing, what about the 64.0.0.0 - 126.255.255.255
block ?
Andy
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
Howard C. Berkowitz
Sent: 07 June 2000 16:45
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: NAT for ISPs
>Howard,
>I s
8 matches
Mail list logo