When it comes to Comcast, I'm just an ordinary residential subscriber,
but they don't use NAT for subscriber addresses as best I can tell.
Certainly, I've never been given one, asked about one, etc.
--Steven M. Bellovin, http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb
Actually the cable modems and Dsl modems usually have a 10.x address they are used by the ISP's to access their internal firware. Also on traces that I have done on both cable and dsl the first hop is invariably a RFC1918 address.
Steven M. Bellovin wrote:
I think i did not make myself clear. The corrections off-list are valid..
However the modems are accessed by the providers using RFC1918 space and not public IP space. This is true it does not mean they are natting the users..however they are using large amounts of RFC1918 space to either save address space in general or save the costs associated with the additional address space they would consume if they did not use the RFC1918 space.
William Warren wrote:
Actually the cable modems and Dsl modems usually have a 10.x address they are used by the ISP's to access their internal firware. Also on traces that I have done on both cable and dsl the first hop is invariably a RFC1918 address.
<snip>
I think i did not make myself clear. The corrections off-list are
valid..
RFC1918 space and not public IP space. This is true it does not mean
and there was a mention at IETF by Alian of comcast (formerly of FT I
thought?) that comcast was looking at an immediate ipv6 rollout: "because
net 10 is not big enough"... 'immediate' on some scale not 'ten years out'
(no timeframes mentioned, sorry)
I suspect Comcast's mouth is bigger than its stomach, as it were. They have
a few other things they may want to tackle before rolling out v6. I don't
see a Comcact v6 rollout positively impacting their reliability.
- Dan
oh, you mean like how are they going to manage that device which is
imbedded and doesn't know from v6 today? 
yea, I was just repeating a
quote from the conference, nothing more. Funny though it was.