Re: [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-jennings-midcom-stun-results-00.txt

On Friday 13 February 2004 10:19 am, Justin Uberti wrote:
> Also, we have observed from our customers this approximate breakdown in
> market share: (obviously heavily skewed toward a US population)
> Linksys     59%
> Netgear     14%
> DLink       13%
> Belkin       5%
> Microsoft    3%
> SMC          2%
> Siemens      2%
> Zyxel        1%
> ActionTec    1%
> 3Com        <1%
> Comcast     <1%
> Dell        <1%

That's very useful info - thanks very much for posting it!

Out of curiosity, does anyone have any similar info about the types of 
"big-iron" NAT boxes are most commonly deployed at the ISP or corporate 
network level rather than at the consumer level?  I assume this area is 
Cisco-dominated, but to what degree, and who are the other significant 
players, if any?  The reason I ask is because it is at this level that not 
only [[port-]restricted] cone NAT becomes important, but also hairpin aka 
loopback translation support becomes critical, if users behind the same 
top-level NAT but separate second-level (consumer) NATs are to be able to 
talk to each other.

Justin, you folks at AOL deploy a lot of such boxes, don't you?  Do you 
know/can you divulge what type they are and what their NAT behavior is?

Thanks,
Bryan