> CGN-like box. Yes, it's stateless. Doesn't matter, I still need to flow > traffic through a dedicated box because MAP won't be implemented in my > regular routers (if you know otherwise, please speak up).
Yes, MAP (T-Translation or E-Encap mode) is implemented on two regular routers that I know of - ASR9K and ASR1K. Without that, you are right that MAP wouldn't have been as beneficial as claimed. > It's still NAT. Yes, assuming MAP-T. No, assuming, MAP-E Cheers, Rajiv -----Original Message----- From: Mikael Abrahamsson <swm...@swm.pp.se> Organization: People's Front Against WWW Date: Monday, April 8, 2013 6:01 AM To: Rajiv Asati <raj...@cisco.com> Cc: nanog list <nanog@nanog.org> Subject: Re: Verizon DSL moving to CGN >On Mon, 8 Apr 2013, Rajiv Asati (rajiva) wrote: > >> Thankfully, MAP is not CGN. Correctly stated, unlike DS-Lite, MAP >> doesn't require any CGN that causes the SP network to put up with the >> NAT state. This means that all the subsequent issues of CGN/DS-Lite no >> longer apply. > >For me as an operator, MAP is most likely going to be implemented in a >CGN-like box. Yes, it's stateless. Doesn't matter, I still need to flow >traffic through a dedicated box because MAP won't be implemented in my >regular routers (if you know otherwise, please speak up). > >> MAP is all about stateless (NAT64 of Encapsulation) and IPv6 enabled >> access. MAP makes much more sense in any SP network having its internet >> customers do IPv4 address sharing and embrace IPv6. > >It's still NAT. > >-- >Mikael Abrahamsson email: swm...@swm.pp.se
