RFC 9693 on Benchmarking Methodology for Stateful NATxy Gateways
rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org Fri, 10 January 2025 22:02 UTC
Return-Path: <wwwrun@rfcpa.rfc-editor.org>
X-Original-To: ietf-announce@ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietf-announce@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from rfcpa.rfc-editor.org (unknown [167.172.21.234]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-256) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 883C4C14F736; Fri, 10 Jan 2025 14:02:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: by rfcpa.rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 461) id EB7A021D1BC; Fri, 10 Jan 2025 14:02:41 -0800 (PST)
To: ietf-announce@ietf.org, rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
Subject: RFC 9693 on Benchmarking Methodology for Stateful NATxy Gateways
From: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
Content-type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Message-Id: <20250110220241.EB7A021D1BC@rfcpa.rfc-editor.org>
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2025 14:02:41 -0800
Message-ID-Hash: NEKBDEJPK5I6PWMFM6DQBCTF5N4AT6HR
X-Message-ID-Hash: NEKBDEJPK5I6PWMFM6DQBCTF5N4AT6HR
X-MailFrom: wwwrun@rfcpa.rfc-editor.org
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-ietf-announce.ietf.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
CC: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org, drafts-update-ref@iana.org, bmwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc6
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IETF announcement list. No discussions." <ietf-announce.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-announce/RcoxlnXCaIuMMYjt0QA2kzbQgFY>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf-announce>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-announce-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:ietf-announce-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-announce@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:ietf-announce-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-announce-leave@ietf.org>
A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries. RFC 9693 Title: Benchmarking Methodology for Stateful NATxy Gateways Author: G. Lencse, K. Shima Status: Informational Stream: IETF Date: January 2025 Mailbox: lencse@sze.hu, shima@wide.ad.jp Pages: 24 Updates/Obsoletes/SeeAlso: None I-D Tag: draft-ietf-bmwg-benchmarking-stateful-09.txt URL: https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9693 DOI: 10.17487/RFC9693 RFC 2544 defines a benchmarking methodology for network interconnect devices. RFC 5180 addresses IPv6 specificities, and it also provides a technology update but excludes IPv6 transition technologies. RFC 8219 addresses IPv6 transition technologies, including stateful NAT64. However, none of them discuss how to apply pseudorandom port numbers from RFC 4814 to any stateful NATxy (such as NAT44, NAT64, and NAT66) technologies. This document discusses why using pseudorandom port numbers with stateful NATxy gateways is a difficult problem. It recommends a solution that limits the port number ranges and uses two test phases (phase 1 and phase 2). This document shows how the classic performance measurement procedures (e.g., throughput, frame loss rate, latency, etc.) can be carried out. New performance metrics and measurement procedures are also defined for measuring the maximum connection establishment rate, connection tear-down rate, and connection tracking table capacity. This document is a product of the Benchmarking Methodology Working Group of the IETF. INFORMATIONAL: This memo provides information for the Internet community. It does not specify an Internet standard of any kind. Distribution of this memo is unlimited. This announcement is sent to the IETF-Announce and rfc-dist lists. To subscribe or unsubscribe, see https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce https://mailman.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist For searching the RFC series, see https://www.rfc-editor.org/search For downloading RFCs, see https://www.rfc-editor.org/retrieve/bulk Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the author of the RFC in question, or to rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org. Unless specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for unlimited distribution. The RFC Editor Team