Re: [Softwires] [BEHAVE] Stateless Deterministic NAPT/DS-Lite

On 11/7/11 6:54 AM, "Alain Durand" <adurand@juniper.net> wrote:

> 
> On Nov 4, 2011, at 2:21 AM, Henderickx, Wim (Wim) wrote:
> 
>> Reinaldo,
>> 
>> What happens if a customer wants to get more ports than the CPE owns?
> 
> Similar to the other stateless proposals such a 4rd or divi, there is no
> provision to dynamically extend that range allocated by the ISP.
> The consensus that was expressed a number of time in the wg is that if you
> need this flexibility,
> a stateless solution is the wrong approach, you'd be be better of with a
> stateful solution.

Actually Alain, we can do it. It is a trade-off between public IP usage
efficiency and management.

If CPE run out of ports that subscriber/private IP, if changing IP is not an
option, is moved to another deterministic NAT pool with larger ranges.
Everything is transparent.  This assumes you have a two-tier NAT pool model
(which is common), apart from that it is okay.

> 
> 
>> How would PCP operate with this model?
> 
> This is an interesting question... This should make the life of the PCP server
> rather easy, as there will be no state to keep there too.
> 
> Alain.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> Wim
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: softwires-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:softwires-bounces@ietf.org] On
>> Behalf Of Reinaldo Penno
>> Sent: vrijdag 4 november 2011 1:33
>> To: Poscic, Kristian (Kristian); softwires@ietf.org; behave@ietf.org
>> Subject: Re: [Softwires] [BEHAVE] Stateless Deterministic NAPT/DS-Lite
>> 
>> Hello Kristian,
>> 
>> comments inline.
>> 
>> 
>> On 11/3/11 4:38 PM, "Poscic, Kristian (Kristian)"
>> <kristian.poscic@alcatel-lucent.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> Just to make sure I understand this.
>>> 
>>> Deterministic (statefull) NAT is deterministically translating inside IP to
>>> outside IP + port range (take NAT44 case).
>> 
>> Yes. 
>> 
>>> 
>>> Deterministic stateLESS NAT is deterministically translating inside IP +
>>> inside_src_port to outside IP + outside_src_port.
>>> No states are required since the incoming traffic in the downstream
>>> direction
>>> (outside IP +port) can be deterministically translated to inside IP+port.
>>> Any incoming traffic from outside will be mapped to something (predictable)
>>> on
>>> the inside even though there may be no traffic initiated from the inside.
>> 
>> Correct, no need for previous outbound packet. Subscriber gets port
>> forwarding naturally as a consequence.
>> 
>>> 
>>> CPE still needs statefull NAT.
>>> 
>>> Is this correct?
>> 
>> Yes.
>> 
>>> Thanks,
>>> Kris
>>> 
>>> 
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: behave-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:behave-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
>>> Reinaldo Penno
>>> Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2011 4:12 PM
>>> To: softwires@ietf.org; behave@ietf.org
>>> Subject: [BEHAVE] Stateless Deterministic NAPT/DS-Lite
>>> 
>>> Hello,
>>> 
>>> we submitted a new draft detailing our implementation of
>>> Stateless-Deterministic NAPT44 and DS-Lite. (SD-NAT)
>>> 
>>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-penno-softwire-sdnat-01
>>> 
>>> This is a based on our experience with port bucket/chunk allocation and
>>> deterministic NAPT44. In the draft we provide a comparison with other
>>> stateless/stateful methods floating around.
>>> 
>>> Thanks,
>>> 
>>> Reinaldo
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Behave mailing list
>>> Behave@ietf.org
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/behave
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Softwires mailing list
>> Softwires@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
>> _______________________________________________
>> Behave mailing list
>> Behave@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/behave
> 