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