IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: draft-chen-v6ops-nat64-experience-02

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Wed, 18 July 2012 14:25 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr@sandelman.ca>
X-Original-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17C5421F876D for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 18 Jul 2012 07:25:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.318
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.318 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.036, BAYES_00=-2.599, HOST_MISMATCH_NET=0.311, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334, J_CHICKENPOX_43=0.6]
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 zBf-XO7PLFdE for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 18 Jul 2012 07:25:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from relay.sandelman.ca (relay.cooperix.net [67.23.6.41]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17B5621F872D for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Wed, 18 Jul 2012 07:25:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sandelman.ca (herring.sandelman.ca [209.87.252.231]) by relay.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B84648252; Wed, 18 Jul 2012 10:22:45 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by sandelman.ca (Postfix, from userid 179) id C61079811D; Wed, 18 Jul 2012 10:26:27 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from herring.sandelman.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id C1623980DA; Wed, 18 Jul 2012 10:26:27 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: Aleksi Suhonen <Aleksi.Suhonen@tut.fi>
Subject: Re: draft-chen-v6ops-nat64-experience-02
In-Reply-To: <50060EB3.9060308@tut.fi>
References: <4FF696AA.3050508@tut.fi> <23986.1341586765@marajade.sandelman.ca> <50060EB3.9060308@tut.fi>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.3; nmh 1.3-dev; XEmacs 21.4 (patch 22)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg="pgp-sha1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2012 10:26:27 -0400
Message-ID: <23978.1342621587@herring.sandelman.ca>
Sender: mcr@sandelman.ca
Cc: sunqiong@ctbri.com.cn, ipv6@ietf.org, niu.qibo@zte.com.cn
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <ipv6.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ipv6>
List-Post: <mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2012 14:25:44 -0000

>>>>> "Aleksi" == Aleksi Suhonen <Aleksi.Suhonen@tut.fi> writes:
    Aleksi> Sorry for late response. It's the summer holiday season
    Aleksi> here. O:-)

    Aleksi> On 07/06/2012 05:59 PM, Michael Richardson wrote:
    >>
    >>>>>>> "Aleksi" == Aleksi Suhonen<Aleksi.Suhonen@tut.fi> writes:
    Aleksi> Within an hour, all the IPv4 addresses in the pool for our
    Aleksi> NAT64 were registered to this one device.
    >> Do I understand that you attempt to provide a single IPv4 address
    >> 1:1 with a an internal IPv6 address? (NAT vs NAPT)

    Aleksi> Yes. Stateless
    Aleksi> NAT64. http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6144#section-3.2.1

okay, so every v6 device gets 1 IPv4.
I think that few people have enough IPv4 to do this, and your research
demonstrates the problems with trying to do that.  I think that most
will do stateful NAPT64.

    >> Can you tell me what your expiry time is for reclaiming the IPv4
    >> address?

    Aleksi> 2 hours. However, anything above 5 minutes will yield the
    Aleksi> same result on today's Internet. And 5 minutes is too short.

    >> Would IPv6 ping'ing the internal device help?

    Aleksi> Hmm? Help with what? I'm not sure I understand you.

Would it help to expire the lease faster if you did a liveness check on
the IPv6 device.


-- 
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email