Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

NAT registers in the microseconds for packet processing time, that isn’t even comparable to Internet path jitter.


> NAT registers in the microseconds for packet processing time, that isn’t even comparable to Internet path jitter.

NAT, at scale, can get expensive:

> Our [American Indian] tribal network started out IPv6, but soon learned we had to somehow support IPv4 only traffic. It took almost 11 months in order to get a small amount of IPv4 addresses allocated for this use. In fact there were only enough addresses to cover maybe 1% of population. So we were forced to create a very expensive proxy/translation server in order to support this traffic.

> We learned a very expensive lesson. 71% of the IPv4 traffic we were supporting was from ROKU devices. 9% coming from DishNetwork & DirectTV satellite tuners, 11% from HomeSecurity cameras and systems, and remaining 9% we replaced extremely outdated Point of Sale(POS) equipment. So we cut ROKU some slack three years ago by spending a little over $300k just to support their devices.

* https://community.roku.com/t5/Features-settings-updates/It-s...

* Discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35047624


Okay, but back to the original question, how does this affect latency or bandwidth?


> Okay, but back to the original question, how does this affect latency or bandwidth?

The CG-NAT gear takes time to process the request and has a finite bandwidth.


Does this present a latency or bandwidth bottleneck?


Its the $$ cost of big nat hardware, compared with dumber routers

If someone is torrenting behind the NAT you can get exhaustions


You'd be looking at having on upwards of 10k (probably much more) peers to even come close to exhaustion.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: