Reviews:
 ·Comcast
| reply to bn1221
Re: It'll be a slow process Phones (not just smartphones) have been Web-capable (in the US, and elsewhere) for years. I have the Samsung SCH-a610 (which I bought as a PAYG phone from VZW in 2005); it was Web-capable when I bought it, and it was FAR from being the first Web-capable phone. Also, if you are going to NAT a phone, where do you put the router? At the tower (where it's carrier-controlled)? In the home? (T-Mobile is trying that; how well is it working in terms of phones and capable routers?) If a device will surf the Web (or communicate via the Internet) it needs either NAT or a routable public IP. NAT is a kludge (elegant, but still a kludge), and it does not take certain things into account by design (in short, there are certain things that NAT is specifically designed NOT to allow). As more devices need public/routable IP addresses (mostly because NAT for such devices is not workable/practical), the IPv4 address shortfall will simply become more obvious. |
