[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

OpenDNS CGNAT Issues

For a truckload of gold, Iâ??m pretty sure most of us would make that work â?º


From: NANOG <nanog-bounces+kenny.taylor=kccd.edu at nanog.org> On Behalf Of Owen DeLong
Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2018 10:04 PM
To: Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists at gmail.com>
Cc: nanog list <nanog at nanog.org>
Subject: Re: OpenDNS CGNAT Issues

On Sep 11, 2018, at 21:58 , Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists at gmail.com<mailto:morrowc.lists at gmail.com>> wrote:

On Tue, Sep 11, 2018 at 9:06 PM Jerry Cloe <jerry at jtcloe.net<mailto:jerry at jtcloe.net>> wrote:
OpenDNS, or anyone for that matter, should never see 100.64/10 ip's. If they do, something is wrong at the source, and OpenDNS wouldn't be able to reply anyway (or at least have the reply route back to the user).

maybeopendns peers directly with such an eyeball network? and in that case maybe they have an agreement to accept traffic from the 100.64 space?

Theyâ??d only be able to do one such agreement per routing environment.

Managing that would be _UGLY_ for the first one and __UGLY__ at scale for anything more than one.

It also pretty much eliminates potential for geographic diversity and anycast for a provider in a local geography.

Certainly not something Iâ??d choose to do if I were OpenDNS unless someone arrived with a very large truck full of gold, diamonds, or other valuable hard assets.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20180912/92afcd9f/attachment.html>