Reply to post: Re: And who told you I want to be measured?

Re: And who told you I want to be measured?

Oh $deity, War and Peace again...

You DID get the "we're out of v4 addresses" memo, right?

I got the "last /8s have been allocated to RIRs" memo. Since then I have acquired quite a few static IPv4 addresses.

I notice you didn't even mention all the protocols that aren't TCP and UDP. Those should work too.

I didn't - because I'm not trying to claim that CGNAT is some sort of panacea, it isn't. But many of the things claimed about it are simply bullshit, which is what I responded to. There's no point in discussing this sort of technology if we're going to base everything on wild claims that are not supported by facts and eveidence.

Of course if it wasn't for NAT then they wouldn't have had the ALGs in the first place...

The ALGs only make things worse, not better, so it's a bit of a stretch to make the claim that you have; it would be more appropriate to say that certain manufacturers have made a prize cock-up in their kit. Actually, that's all that needs saying; - those ALGs are simply broken software deployed by someone who didn't know how to do the job properly.

That's not a fair comparison. Either include the cost of setting up NAT on v4, because the phones won't work without it, or don't include the cost of setting the firewall up on v6

OK - fine. Cost of setting up NAT on my network - £0. It was pre-installed. Cost of setting up firewall - I don't know. I've never costed it. But it took effort on my behalf.

So actually - it's a very fair comparison.

Actually, you know, I really can't be arsed to rebut this any further. It's far too late, and I've got better things to do.

Vic.