Re: [BEHAVE] Home NAPT44 - How many ports?

"Reinaldo Penno (repenno)" <repenno@cisco.com> Wed, 05 June 2013 19:25 UTC

Return-Path: <repenno@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: behave@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: behave@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A581321F9AB8; Wed, 5 Jun 2013 12:25:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.099
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.100, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_83=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id XPoEmxseDO5A; Wed, 5 Jun 2013 12:25:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-2.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-2.cisco.com [173.37.86.73]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ABC1321F8808; Wed, 5 Jun 2013 12:25:18 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=4081; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1370460318; x=1371669918; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to: content-id:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=b49WIL1Ep8qYdWlzth5PaJxUt/8WbzvqgibUvQOx73U=; b=dXje9RVTCeJK/Qu8GtSScltvBceLjH+GlEr1NubhVrOeu1xjEOOkVsp0 AnHsFKgTEGXU7T4CjZwRIwoxoOuv4ZYOBJpiVtaxpsdv9OuzyNk3gdVgo nw2tfIswffxaOJ7tzPVIip6/N6gadGXFJqMbWh25S2WvY8MMZmnF/qFvU 8=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AnMNAHiPr1GtJV2Z/2dsb2JhbABaFoFbCIEQML8/fxZ0giMBAQEEAQEBNzQLDAYBCBEEAQEBChQJLgsUCQgBAQQBDQUIAYgEDL1SjWoPgQExBwaCdGEDo1+FIIMPgWkIFx8
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.87,809,1363132800"; d="scan'208";a="219224168"
Received: from rcdn-core-2.cisco.com ([173.37.93.153]) by rcdn-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 05 Jun 2013 19:25:18 +0000
Received: from xhc-rcd-x15.cisco.com (xhc-rcd-x15.cisco.com [173.37.183.89]) by rcdn-core-2.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r55JPIEP026188 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Wed, 5 Jun 2013 19:25:18 GMT
Received: from xmb-rcd-x04.cisco.com ([169.254.8.77]) by xhc-rcd-x15.cisco.com ([173.37.183.89]) with mapi id 14.02.0318.004; Wed, 5 Jun 2013 14:25:17 -0500
From: "Reinaldo Penno (repenno)" <repenno@cisco.com>
To: "Rajiv Asati (rajiva)" <rajiva@cisco.com>, "Poscic, Kristian (Kristian)" <kristian.poscic@alcatel-lucent.com>, "v6ops@ietf.org" <v6ops@ietf.org>, "Softwires-wg list (softwires@ietf.org)" <softwires@ietf.org>, "behave@ietf.org" <behave@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [BEHAVE] Home NAPT44 - How many ports?
Thread-Index: Ac5h7Gh9xwUId/SJTdSA920KKgIqlAAA9zuwAAkCoAAAAicnkAAFj40A
Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2013 19:25:16 +0000
Message-ID: <45A697A8FFD7CF48BCF2BE7E106F0604090A0B86@xmb-rcd-x04.cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <B14A62A57AB87D45BB6DD7D9D2B78F0B116D32B0@xmb-rcd-x06.cisco.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.13.0.110805
x-originating-ip: [10.86.243.252]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <7D2E7946FC55804CBDC577E1BBCD5C62@emea.cisco.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "Erik Kline \(ek@google.com\)" <ek@google.com>
Subject: Re: [BEHAVE] Home NAPT44 - How many ports?
X-BeenThere: behave@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: mailing list of BEHAVE IETF WG <behave.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/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, 05 Jun 2013 19:25:25 -0000

that's right.

Depending on how much stuff you have running there might be long term TCP
connections to mail servers, IM servers, Etc.

With the 'connected home' I'm assuming this will go up.


On 6/5/13 3:51 PM, "Rajiv Asati (rajiva)" <rajiva@cisco.com> wrote:

>Reinaldo,
>
>I agree with you. Until I enabled DNS proxy on my router, I noticed that
>UDP NAT exceeded TCP NAT entries in few occasions. Since DNS proxy got
>enabled, UDP NAT entries became negligible.
>
>One interesting observation is how the lowest number of TCP NAT entries
>stayed within the range throughout the night time (when the devices were
>not manually used) based on how many apps (on the smartphones) were left
>running. For ex, ~200 TCP ports on April 13-14, or ~30 TCP ports June 4.
>
>Cheers,
>Rajiv
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Reinaldo Penno (repenno)
>> Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2013 11:44 AM
>> To: Poscic, Kristian (Kristian); Rajiv Asati (rajiva); v6ops@ietf.org;
>>Softwires-
>> wg list (softwires@ietf.org); behave@ietf.org
>> Cc: Erik Kline (ek@google.com)
>> Subject: Re: [BEHAVE] Home NAPT44 - How many ports?
>> 
>> Yes, there are regional differences. But even then, in general, 90% of
>>the
>> active users can be covered by 1000 ports. I have been collecting data
>>for
>> many years, and actually the number of TCP ports consumed have been
>> going Down due to a number of factors.
>> 
>> On the other hand, as Rajiv captured,the number of UDP sessions can be
>> much larger than the number of TCP. Because the way dynamic webpages
>> are constructed today, there are sometimes literally 100s of DNS
>>requests to
>> download a single page.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 6/5/13 10:32 AM, "Poscic, Kristian (Kristian)"
>> <kristian.poscic@alcatel-lucent.com> wrote:
>> 
>> >Thanks. Can you tell us in general what applications did you use for
>>this?
>> >This heavily depends on the application type in use...p2p apps, etc.
>> >Since some apps spawn a large number of TCP ports for example.
>> >
>> >So the question is to what degree do you think is your sample
>> >representative of a general user in any region?
>> >
>> >For example does it cover 30% of users for an ISP in NA while it covers
>> >80% of users for another ISP in APAC for example?
>> >
>> >-----Original Message-----
>> >From: behave-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:behave-bounces@ietf.org] On
>> >Behalf Of Rajiv Asati (rajiva)
>> >Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2013 6:14 AM
>> >To: v6ops@ietf.org; Softwires-wg list (softwires@ietf.org);
>> >behave@ietf.org
>> >Cc: Erik Kline (ek@google.com)
>> >Subject: [BEHAVE] Home NAPT44 - How many ports?
>> >
>> >Some of you may recall our discussion (during the last IETF) around
>> >"how many TCP/UDP ports are enough with NAPT44" per home, as ISPs
>> move
>> >into
>> >A+P paradigm. ~500, ~1000, ~3000???
>> >
>> >Well, I started monitoring my home router and plotting the NAPT44 port
>> >utilization on a minute-by-minute basis. You may find it here -
>> >http://www.employees.org/~rajiva
>> >
>> >In short, port range of 500 seems ok, though 1000 would be more than
>> >enough for my home. Suffice to say, this is just a sample
>> >representation, since the port utilization would vary home to home,
>> >based on number of active devices, type of applications, the degree of
>> >simultaneous device or application usage etc.
>> >
>> >If any of you are doing similar monitoring, then please share.
>> >
>> >Cheers,
>> >Rajiv
>> >
>> >PS: Thanks to Erik Kline, who explained (with sufficient details) how
>> >to use google charting for my data. And thanks to Xun Wang & Shaoshuai
>> >Dai for helping me out significantly.
>> >
>> >PS: My home has 3-4 active devices.
>> >_______________________________________________
>> >Behave mailing list
>> >Behave@ietf.org
>> >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/behave
>> >_______________________________________________
>> >Behave mailing list
>> >Behave@ietf.org
>> >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/behave
>