[RAM] A curious Internet service offering
RJ Atkinson <rja@extremenetworks.com> Wed, 02 January 2008 16:13 UTC
Return-path: <ram-bounces@iab.org>
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JA6E0-0006tU-8h; Wed, 02 Jan 2008 11:13:48 -0500
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JA6Dz-0006tO-3s for ram@iab.org; Wed, 02 Jan 2008 11:13:47 -0500
Received: from eastrmmtao101.cox.net ([68.230.240.7]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JA6Dw-0004p7-U5 for ram@iab.org; Wed, 02 Jan 2008 11:13:47 -0500
Received: from eastrmimpo03.cox.net ([68.1.16.126]) by eastrmmtao101.cox.net (InterMail vM.7.08.02.01 201-2186-121-102-20070209) with ESMTP id <20080102161344.VGN129.eastrmmtao101.cox.net@eastrmimpo03.cox.net> for <ram@iab.org>; Wed, 2 Jan 2008 11:13:44 -0500
Received: from [10.30.20.71] ([68.10.115.26]) by eastrmimpo03.cox.net with bizsmtp id YG1w1Y00J0aEP1Q0000000; Wed, 02 Jan 2008 11:01:57 -0500
Message-Id: <FC9DB879-0F83-47F7-9C3D-6C487BAFC330@extremenetworks.com>
From: RJ Atkinson <rja@extremenetworks.com>
To: ram@iab.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v915)
Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2008 11:13:43 -0500
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.915)
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 92df29fa99cf13e554b84c8374345c17
Subject: [RAM] A curious Internet service offering
X-BeenThere: ram@iab.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Routing and Addressing Mailing List <ram.iab.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ram>, <mailto:ram-request@iab.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ram>
List-Post: <mailto:ram@iab.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ram-request@iab.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ram>, <mailto:ram-request@iab.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: ram-bounces@iab.org
(NB: This doesn't directly relate to IRTF RRG work, but it does relate to routing & addressing futures, so the IAB RAM list seems to be the right venue for this narrow observation and any followup discussion that might occur.) I recently became aware of a large residential broadband operator in North America that provides no global-scope IP addresses to its customers. By default there are no global-scope IP addresses -- and none are available as an option at any price to residential broadband subscribers to this particular service. Instead, this operator deploys a combination/integrated home gateway at each customer site. This gateway is managed exclusively by the network operator. The only customer option (at time of installation) is whether wireless is enabled or not. This gateway performs NAT/NAPT, has an 802.11 wireless service on the customer side with WEP and WPA (but NOT 802.11i or WPA2), and uses DHCP to distribute private (RFC-1918; specifically 192.168.x/24) IP addresses to whatever devices the customer has on offer. This CPE box also includes a 4-port Ethernet hub on the inside of the NAT/NAPT to connect to any wired networks in the house. Further, there are sundry additional packet/port filters inside this CPE box. The net result is that this particular operator isn't really providing a "dialtone IP" service. Instead, it is more nearly a "only web and email access" service. For example, there are widespread reports that online gaming (e.g. using XBOX) does not work with this service. There are also complaints online about how various uncommonly used transport-layer ports seem to be blocked. The most commonly used ports (DNS, HTTP, HTTPS, IMAP4, SMTP, POP3) appear to work through this CPE box. Of course, VoIP is also blocked -- though this operator does offer POTS lines via a separate adapter located at the customer premise. It is unclear to me whether/how this CPE integrated/combination home gateway is addressed. One could imagine the CPE box being inside 10.0/8 and individual customers being inside 192.168.x/24 with NAT/NAPT in the CPE box and then again at some larger gateway between the local region of this service and the public again. I don't know for certain whether the CPE box is addressed by IP, whether it has a private IP address, or whether it has a global-scope IP address. NOTE WELL: The operator has no issues with IPv4 address availability. This is simply how they chose to define their service offering. They market it as "High-speed Internet". They believe that customers actually prefer to have the operator provide this narrower service rather than a "dial-tone IP" service. TWO QUICK OBSERVATIONS: If this becomes a widely used deployment model, and customers accept this, then there are at least two implications to consider: 1) IPv4 Address shortages might not be as big an issue as some think. 2) New services really are only deployable over HTTP/HTTPS. Nearly any other new protocol, NAT/NAPT-friendly or not, would likely not be usable by these end users. I find the whole thing quite curious and unexpected. I am sure that other folks mileage likely will vary somehwat from my own. Ran rja@extremenetworks.com _______________________________________________ RAM mailing list RAM@iab.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ram
- [RAM] A curious Internet service offering RJ Atkinson
- RE: [RAM] A curious Internet service offering Templin, Fred L
- Re: [RAM] A curious Internet service offering David Meyer
- Re: [RAM] A curious Internet service offering Roland Dobbins
- Re: [RAM] A curious Internet service offering Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [RAM] A curious Internet service offering Iljitsch van Beijnum
- Re: [RAM] A curious Internet service offering Roland Dobbins
- Re: [RAM] A curious Internet service offering Bob Hinden
- Re: [RAM] A curious Internet service offering Roland Dobbins
- Re: [RAM] A curious Internet service offering Lixia Zhang
- Re: [RAM] A curious Internet service offering Geoff Huston