[e2e] using p2p overlays to overcome recursive NATs/realms

[Jon Crowcroft]

In message <200202100035.TAA20585 at ginger.lcs.mit.edu>, "J. Noel Chiappa" typed:

 >>I think that all that's going on there is that they've discovered a way to
 >>differentiate certain levels of service, and then they can charge people
 >>extra money for the "higher" level. This is also happening with running
 >>web servers on your machine(s), etc, etc, etc.

this is why NAT workarounds might have a viable business model - you can offer
end user  another level of service (same as the old one - global reacahbility:-)
 >>
 >>Also, perhaps an explanation for the difference between your view and
 >>Randy's is that the perspective of what I will call "wholesale" ISP's wrt
 >>address charging may be different from that of "retail" ISP's - the latter
 >>are the ones that are likely to be into the "$X per month per IP address"
 >>game.
 >>
 >>    > the operators have fallen in love with the kludges like .. NAT
 >>    > "features".
 >>
 >>From that perspective, the operators who are charging for extra addresses
 >>probably hate NAT boxes, since they have a negative impact on their
 >>revenue.

this "hate" is certainly not somethign that is detectable in the UK  - many of them seem to
be adding more NATtitude by the day...

 cheers

   jon