On Thursday 24 September 2009 17:44:38 Marco Hogewoning wrote:
On 24 sep 2009, at 16:30, Kostas Zorbadelos wrote:
If a /24 is used for NAT, considering the size of RIPE meetings, I guess nobody will notice anything inconvenient.
It's a 1 in 3 mapping if you count heads, I guess devices is 1 on 5 :) If you think this won't raise any issues I guess the world in general doesn't have a problem, we can simply extend the IPv4 space by a multiple of 5 :P
I didn't say there are no issues, I said the people will not feel inconvenient.
Even if open ports wouldn't be an issue, think of:
- inbound connections (people using VOIP)
There are ugly ways to address this (eg ALG).
- VPN to connect back home (meeting is still providing fixed IP for that purpose)
I have used openVPN in a NAT environment without problems.
- CPU load - traceability (Pentagon got hacked by somebody at RIPE-XX)
:-D Don't get me wrong, I am a proponent of IPv6 and I hate NAT. But unfortunately all those ugly solutions keep IPv4 running, who knows for how long more. Regards, Kostas
Groet,
MarcoH