The vast majority of LTE based last mile users in developing nation environments (where maybe less than 5% of people have residential wireline broadband to their residence) are already behind a cgnat. In many places it's actually an anomaly and weird for a person to desire, or be able to afford, both a broadband internet connection at home with wired router/801.11 AP, and also the (per GB) data service for their cellphone. They choose to go with only the latter. On Sun, Sep 5, 2021 at 6:00 PM Grant Taylor via NANOG <nanog@nanog.org> wrote:
On 9/5/21 3:28 PM, Michael Thomas wrote:
I looked up CGN's this morning and the thing that struck me the most was losing port forwarding. It's probably a small thing to most people but losing it means to get an incoming session it always has to be mediated
by something on the outside. Yuck. So I hope that is not what the future hold, though it probably does.
I think we are heading into a world where Internet is going to be bifurcated with "/on/ the Internet" (with globally routed IP address(es)) or "/access/ /to/ the Internet" (with one or more layers of CGN).
I think that the vast majority of consumers would be content with the latter while a small minority will demand the former.
Content hosting will almost definitely require the former. (Wiggle room is for other arrangements that can be made.)
-- Grant. . . . unix || die