IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [BEHAVE] proprietary implementation v.s standardised protocols //re: draft-xu-behave-nat-state-sync-00

Simon Perreault <simon.perreault@viagenie.ca> Wed, 25 November 2009 23:24 UTC

Return-Path: <simon.perreault@viagenie.ca>
X-Original-To: behave@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: behave@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F3F5F3A6BA1 for <behave@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 25 Nov 2009 15:24:21 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.413
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.413 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.186, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TKvTJ8lbG+Zs for <behave@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 25 Nov 2009 15:24:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: from jazz.viagenie.ca (jazz.viagenie.ca [IPv6:2620:0:230:8000::2]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D87D3A6B8D for <behave@ietf.org>; Wed, 25 Nov 2009 15:24:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: from balaise.nomis80.org (modemcable245.152-21-96.mc.videotron.ca [96.21.152.245]) by jazz.viagenie.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id F3EFD21519 for <behave@ietf.org>; Wed, 25 Nov 2009 18:24:15 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <4B0DBC9F.6030806@viagenie.ca>
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2009 18:24:15 -0500
From: Simon Perreault <simon.perreault@viagenie.ca>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.4pre) Gecko/20090922 Fedora/3.0-3.9.b4.fc12 Thunderbird/3.0b4
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: behave@ietf.org
References: <C732B004.A876%rpenno@juniper.net>
In-Reply-To: <C732B004.A876%rpenno@juniper.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [BEHAVE] proprietary implementation v.s standardised protocols //re: draft-xu-behave-nat-state-sync-00
X-BeenThere: behave@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: mailing list of BEHAVE IETF WG <behave.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/behave>, <mailto:behave-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/behave>
List-Post: <mailto:behave@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:behave-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/behave>, <mailto:behave-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2009 23:24:22 -0000

On 11/25/2009 12:57 PM, Reinaldo Penno wrote:
> If the boxes are from different vendors or even different platforms from the
> same vendor, how to deal with issues such as different memory footprint for
> NAT state, different NAT implementations, different processor speeds, etc?
>
> Most NAT redundancy schemes are 1+1 because the implementation specific
> issues above preclude a heterogeneous solution.

I guess the point is that NAT64 is precise enough that a standard state 
sync protocol is possible.

Compare with NAT44, which was never standardized.

Simon
-- 
DNS64 open-source   --> http://ecdysis.viagenie.ca
STUN/TURN server    --> http://numb.viagenie.ca
vCard 4.0           --> http://www.vcarddav.org

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email