[arin-ppml] Stepping forward, opening my mouth and removing all doubt about

[Kevin Kargel]

>>My guess puts it at 3% to 5% but let's use 10% for our calculations just
to be on the safe side. That's the maximum number of folks choose >>to use
applications which either fail or function suboptimally when behind a
typical NAT firewall.

Speaking as a system administrator for an ISP..  The number of customers who
during the course of a year use applications that would be negatively
affected by nat is more in the range of 80 to 100 %..

Flame this if you want..  I am speaking from experience having tried it..
Instant messaging with file sharing, online gaming (like yahoo and msn
games), game consoles, p2p applications, web cam videoconference, VOIP, VPN,
followed by a host of other applications..  Almost all of my residential
customers use one or more applications in this ilk at least occasionally.. 

Business customers would actually have an easier time with NAT than
residential customers.  Business customers prefer to avoid the p2p apps
anyway, and would be more willing to invest in the one time network
configurations to get their VPN's to work behind a NAT..  Though they are
still stuck if they want to use VOIP to connect offices..

Many VOIP and some VPN implementations cannot even survive the overhead
required for PPPoE, much less the complexities of NAT.

I am not saying this is how it should or has to be, just how it is..

Kevin
 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 3107 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20080828/0464da6f/attachment.bin>