[arin-ppml] inevitability of NAT?
Scott Helms
khelms at zcorum.com
Thu Feb 10 09:41:36 EST 2011
> They work through CONSUMER NAT because consumer NAT has nat traversal facilities like uPNP.
>
> LSN/CGNAT is a whole different ballgame.
>
Lets step back a moment. Why is LSN/CGNAT different from consumer NAT?
Is it only because of a perceived lack of knobs?
If I am going to explain to a CFO that "CGNAT is bad" I have to
articulate exactly why its bad. While I don't know if this is the case
or not there is no reason that the CGNAT vendors can't expose to end
users the ability create forwarding rules based on user profiles (could
be stored in TR-069, RADIUS, DHCP, LDAP, or even DDNS). I may be naive
here because I haven't actually verified with Cisco and the others that
they are planning this but if their product managers missed something
that obvious I will be greatly surprised. While UPnP will not be part
of that solution for obvious reasons building a web page that works with
some sort of storage directory is trivial.
--
Scott Helms
Vice President of Technology
ISP Alliance, Inc. DBA ZCorum
(678) 507-5000
--------------------------------
http://twitter.com/kscotthelms
--------------------------------
More information about the ARIN-PPML
mailing list