And they will learn a little more, that they should provide a quality service. I think it benefits everyone, if the Operator can fix the issue with their supply themselves.
But maybe it would be re-considered in the future. Or maybe the Community can submit a PR for review, like it was with an implementation of the feature to disable the filewalker on start, and we would have a new integrated DynDNS feature early.
Not because of that, but because of:
I think these nodes will be slow without having a public IP. The pull model likely will not work to handle a customers traffic (but may be can be used for a repair traffic 
), the relay model we tried in the past and the relay nodes wanted to get a payment to handling a side traffic for other nodes and also was slower, using STUN servers would require to have them widely distributed across the globe ($$$) and likely will be a bottleneck anyway. Maybe use other nodes as STUN?
Not sure, that STUN would help to traverse CGNAT though. Seems you need a TURN servers and we again returning to relay nodes.
