On 2 Oct 2017, at 16:54, Santiago santiagorr@riseup.net wrote:
El 02/10/17 a las 13:19, Scott Bennett escribió: grarpamp grarpamp@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Oct 2, 2017 at 3:53 AM, Santiago santiagorr@riseup.net wrote:
…
Huh? What kind of ISP NATs its customers' connections? Your ISPshould be assigning your machine/router a legitimate, unique IPv4 address. The assignment is often, even usually, a temporary assignment via DHCP, but it should not be a private address. If NAT is a factor, that should happen at the boundary of your own private network, not at an ISP's facility.
It seems that a French ISP was also planning to share an IPv4 address per four costumers.
…
... One typical problem with running tor on a NATed machine behind such a device is that the NAT table grows until all of the real memory on the device has been consumed and there is no more room for new NAT entries.
I am not currently able to replace the modem/router my ISP provides. But I'd plan to give it away in the future.
In the meantime, I think it would be great to have IPv6-only relays, to avoid this kind of NAT-related issues.
We'd love to make this happen, but the anonymity implications of mixed IPv4-only and IPv6-only (non-clique) networks need further research. Search the list archives for details.
T