[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Nat

Subject: Nat
From: marka at isc.org (Mark Andrews)
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2015 10:52:41 +1100
In-reply-to: <CAAbPayKVqf7r=77Jjks8WJOgm5eqFpD4OqUyTopKBPa2TRvQNA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <[email protected]> <D29747F0.11F8D4%[email protected]> <[email protected]> <CAAbPayKVqf7r=77Jjks8WJOgm5eqFpD4OqUyTopKBPa2TRvQNA@mail.gmail.com>

This doesn't put pain on those that have enough addresses that they don't need
to NAT yet.  We need to put some pain onto everyone that is IPv4 only.

Mark

On 17/12/2015, at 10:39 AM, Charles Monson <charles.lists at camonson.com> wrote:

> We need to make IPv4 painful to use.  Adding  delay between SYN and SYN/ACK would
> be one way to achieve this.  Start at 100ms..200ms and increase it by 100ms each year.
> 
> It seems like NAT would be another way to make IPv4 more painful to use.

Follow-Ups:
- Nat
  - From: mel at beckman.org (Mel Beckman)
- Nat
  - From: randy at psg.com (Randy Bush)

References:
- Nat
  - From: ahmed.dalaali at hrins.net (Ahmed Munaf)
- Nat
  - From: Jason_Livingood at cable.comcast.com (Livingood, Jason)
- Nat
  - From: marka at isc.org (Mark Andrews)
- Nat
  - From: charles.lists at camonson.com (Charles Monson)

Prev by Date: Nat
Next by Date: Nat
Previous by thread: Nat
Next by thread: Nat
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread