I hope it does catch on, because until it does, carrier-grade NAT is going to make the lives of security professionals and location-based providers miserable.
To address the shortage of available IP addresses, carriers are going to start giving out RFC1918 (private) IPv4 addresses to their customers. And the NAT could occur anywhere; you might be a customer in San Francisco but the closest public IP gateway could be in New York. (Yes, we have seen this.)
This is going to cause two serious problems for businesses:
(1) Location-based services are going to break. LBS uses the public IP address as the primary key in the database.
(2) DoS protection that is IP-based (counting request rates from particular IPs) is going to break. I suspect a lot more sites that we all know and love are going to have a difficult time staying up after CGNAT is pervasive.
To address the shortage of available IP addresses, carriers are going to start giving out RFC1918 (private) IPv4 addresses to their customers. And the NAT could occur anywhere; you might be a customer in San Francisco but the closest public IP gateway could be in New York. (Yes, we have seen this.)
This is going to cause two serious problems for businesses:
(1) Location-based services are going to break. LBS uses the public IP address as the primary key in the database.
(2) DoS protection that is IP-based (counting request rates from particular IPs) is going to break. I suspect a lot more sites that we all know and love are going to have a difficult time staying up after CGNAT is pervasive.