El 02/10/17 a las 13:19, Scott Bennett escribió: > grarpamp <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Mon, Oct 2, 2017 at 3:53 AM, Santiago <[email protected]> wrote: … > > Huh? What kind of ISP NATs its customers' connections? Your ISP > should 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. … > I'll second the above comments. Most of those little router boxes are > running some form of LINUX or FreeBSD as an embedded configuration, which > includes swapping and paging being disabled due to the absence of secondary > storage. All of them have limited RAM. 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. Cheers, -- S _______________________________________________ tor-relays mailing list [email protected] https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
