Hi, Christopher:
Thanks for the confirmation.
Regards,
Abe (2024-01-13 11:42)
On 2024-01-12 07:30, Christopher Hawker wrote:
"Source NAT changes the source address in IP header of a packet. It
may also change the source port in the TCP/UDP headers. The typical
usage is to change the a
"Source NAT changes the source address in IP header of a packet. It may
also change the source port in the TCP/UDP headers. The typical usage is to
change the a private (rfc1918) address/port into a public address/port for
packets leaving your network."
"Destination NAT changes the destination
Hi, Christopher:
1) " destination/source NAT ":
I am not sure about this terminology. Could you please elaborate?
If you are referring EzIP being a bigger CG-NAT, it is exactly correct.
That is, the first step of EzIP implementation is just to give CG-NAT a
larger netblock to work
The problem isn't the quantity of "inside" CG-NAT address space. It's the
existence of CG-NAT at all.
It doesn't matter if the available space is a /12 or a /4, you still need
something to translate it to the public internet. The existence of that
CG-NAT box is a thorn in every provider's side
Not going to lie, EzIP just seems to be some version of destination/source
NAT on steroids.
Regards,
Christopher Hawker
On Fri, 12 Jan 2024 at 14:36, Abraham Y. Chen wrote:
> Hi, Forrest:
>
> 0)Thanks for your in-depth analysis.
>
> 1) However, my apologies for not presenting the EzIP
Hi, Forrest:
0) Thanks for your in-depth analysis.
1) However, my apologies for not presenting the EzIP concept
clearer. That is, one way to look at the EzIP scheme is to substitute
the current 100.64/10 netblock in the CG-NAT with 240/4. Everything
else in the current CG-NAT setup
6 matches
Mail list logo
