Try looking for the expanded terms: Large Scale NAT Carrier Grade NAT NAT444
Owen On Feb 9, 2011, at 11:58 AM, david raistrick wrote: > On Wed, 9 Feb 2011, Scott Helms wrote: > >> For ISPs in this circumstance the choice will be CGNAT rather than IPv6 for >> a number of years because the cost is much lower and according to the >> vendors selling CGNAT solutions the impact to end users is (almost) >> unnoticeable. > > Anyone care to define CGNAT? Google results for this are either unrelated or > "CGNAT will save us" or "CGNAT doesnt count" - no rfcs, no explainations, > nothing.... > > > > -- > david raistrick http://www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html > dr...@icantclick.org http://www.expita.com/nomime.html >
