Re: [BEHAVE] Port Management To Reduce Logging In Large-Scale NATs

[Tina TSOU <[e-mail]>]

Big pool and small pool are containing relationship. Release the port first 
to the small pool. After finishing releasing all the ports in the small 
pool, release the port to the big port. Here we go, there is no 
fragmentation.

B. R.
Tina
http://tinatsou.weebly.com/index.html

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Reinaldo Penno" <[e-mail]>
To: "Senthil Sivakumar (ssenthil)" <[e-mail]>; "Tina TSOU" 
<[e-mail]>; <[e-mail]>
Sent: Wednesday, September 01, 2010 3:40 PM
Subject: Re: [BEHAVE] Port Management To Reduce Logging In Large-Scale NATs


Agreed. I mentioned on the first email that there are basically two choices:

* Individual port release which in the long run leads to fragmentation but
better resource use.

* Or allocating/releasing in blocks of well-known size which in a sense is
almost a static division given a number N of subscribers.


On 9/1/10 12:35 AM, "Senthil Sivakumar (ssenthil)" <[e-mail]>
wrote:

> [Senthil] I would think the port ranges are allocated/deallocated in
> blocks to avoid fragmentation. Otherwise,
> it would prove difficult to manage the ports within a short span of
> time. The question now may be how is oversubscription handled. For
> instance, subscriber A is idle and not using his ports for the past n
> minutes and subscriber Z wants more ports because he is actively
> opening/closing connections but doesn't have any ports, what do we do. I
> guess that is a network administration issue to solve.