Re: [v6ops] draft-ietf-v6ops-nat64-experience-02.txt comments

Tom Taylor <tom.taylor.stds@gmail.com> Wed, 10 July 2013 15:07 UTC

Return-Path: <tom.taylor.stds@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBFD921F8BE6 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Jul 2013 08:07:11 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 t9qNkPn0Vax4 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Jul 2013 08:07:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ie0-x22a.google.com (mail-ie0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c03::22a]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D75121F9F75 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Wed, 10 Jul 2013 08:07:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ie0-f170.google.com with SMTP id e11so16024182iej.29 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Wed, 10 Jul 2013 08:07:09 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=QDCvvm8Y2bEPFfcR1KvEuEtamwQZi2INuf+/S32Ln0A=; b=KYidDJzmpRenaXXtkzBCQlCg4f3yi7Z0va/CVLH8tiXK1QzvfNljNJTrkGGrm0pfTl +jm7MXGACJQKAt0hQxokuHyYhRY/lpM70KpnUS0+3PFkQlaR+kO0rLpSjcrjTbd+KECO UkS8EqqjIm/CKORFdQvFHvnKv4rPOjQ/vfavGPwDREHypXQ40OAqpAbjhtBysKW6+b1h PsKoAsWiEMULUVOhdSjvWSoeKreJMebHGInTXv4OWXM2NkE3bQBp88wBpMWAmVb3cWIf 8jM3TuBY7YHL79qZ8xeCVBFwbnPEBLqVqrK21mUz9jWLiTN4oa7+Yqx3U4iDqVreZ3aF NakQ==
X-Received: by 10.50.1.78 with SMTP id 14mr9700590igk.60.1373468829853; Wed, 10 Jul 2013 08:07:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.64] ([216.254.161.150]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id nr4sm11997688igb.0.2013.07.10.08.07.08 for <multiple recipients> (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 10 Jul 2013 08:07:09 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <51DD789E.8090306@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2013 11:07:10 -0400
From: Tom Taylor <tom.taylor.stds@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130620 Thunderbird/17.0.7
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: GangChen <phdgang@gmail.com>
References: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1307101000270.8891@uplift.swm.pp.se> <CAM+vMET=MdpLgeQXH2Lk_j2YqNdaKxehrzjPjFJsts2qAZmSog@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.DEB.2.00.1307101232120.8891@uplift.swm.pp.se>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1307101232120.8891@uplift.swm.pp.se>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: v6ops@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [v6ops] draft-ietf-v6ops-nat64-experience-02.txt comments
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: v6ops discussion list <v6ops.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/v6ops>
List-Post: <mailto:v6ops@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2013 15:07:12 -0000

We are working on logging drafts in Behave. Bulk port allocation can 
work as Mikael states. On the other hand, if the provider is using MAP 
or Lightweight 4over6, port allocation happens at provisioning time and 
may if desired be logged by network infrastructure (DHCP, AAA).

Tom Taylor

On 10/07/2013 6:35 AM, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
> On Wed, 10 Jul 2013, GangChen wrote:
>
>> That is an interesting use. How do you implement those IPv4 pool
>> allocations?  I heard some NAT64 implementations could allocate
>> different IPv4 pools to each inbound interface. Are you doing in the
>> similar way?
>
> Some vendors allow certain IPv6 source addresses to go to certain
> outside IPv4 pool of addresses.
>
>> If I understand correctly, that is a static port block allocation. A
>> port block would be reserved to a particular customer. No logging
>> information needed. will clarify at the next update.
>
> Well, actually the block would be allocated upon first traffic seen from
> a certain source IPv6 address. Perhaps there are references to this in
> other RFCs that could be useful.
>
> For instance (I'm sure there are a lot more):
>
> http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/86/slides/slides-86-behave-2
>
> http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/routers/asr9000/software/asr9k_r4.3/cg_nat/configuration/guide/cgnat43cgn.html#wp1015343
>
>
> Bulk Port Allocation
>
> The creation and deletion of NAT sessions need to be logged and these
> create huge amount of data. These are stored on Syslog collector which
> is supported over UDP. In order to reduce the volume of data generated
> by the NAT device, bulk port allocation can be enabled. When bulk port
> allocation is enabled and when a subscriber creates the first session, a
> number of contiguous outside ports are pre-allocated. A bulk allocation
> message is logged indicating this allocation. Subsequent session
> creations will use one of the pre-allocated port and hence does not
> require logging.
>