IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] double nat

Ivan Pepelnjak <ipepelnjak@gmail.com> Tue, 02 October 2012 12:44 UTC

Return-Path: <ipepelnjak@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 A410521F87C9 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Oct 2012 05:44:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_13=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id EB1nOjfoxS29 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Oct 2012 05:44:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-bk0-f44.google.com (mail-bk0-f44.google.com [209.85.214.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF28D21F87AD for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Tue, 2 Oct 2012 05:44:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by bkcjc3 with SMTP id jc3so5463870bkc.31 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Tue, 02 Oct 2012 05:44:25 -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=avDN+DIBcbFMVV7G4KCxiR5ZJ+JidUBPMUmKi8DcCfs=; b=RZtynaCE4xmBPMdK1qgXHnKNqxN1SkUeJx6MfxPNcs1zA/2hw7Fs2cAJzE0v3Zgzc6 eomZ+riLAlJsTYiqVZ7fMC2OB3tQGZz2x6pUIU/3sPfJF4h77gD930gVZIGa4LNRoXEe efBuCcFZMYsHSrIk1T2btEG9tX6JAtxAAmUbgzd4K5e36PzEJXn3xBMgNFdoDQgbVAqX oal4aYq5jZJjrcVVf0g1rONfFbj1qBTDLjKcr8g9IdFzsfkwwBVpniM5hk/WrdeMyuH/ AJ22AYq7PRZ8ZCN4EBIjj1LDbpOka2q0SilQzpIDf2VVKXUhNCv+y1KicBfLpRKvkegJ pQsg==
Received: by 10.204.148.12 with SMTP id n12mr6566962bkv.62.1349181865836; Tue, 02 Oct 2012 05:44:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from Ivans-MacBook-Air.local ([193.110.145.6]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id gy18sm1097567bkc.4.2012.10.02.05.44.23 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 02 Oct 2012 05:44:24 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <506AE1A6.8090802@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 02 Oct 2012 14:44:22 +0200
From: Ivan Pepelnjak <ipepelnjak@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:12.0) Gecko/20120428 Thunderbird/12.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
References: <m2lifpnpvf.wl%randy@psg.com> <506ADDA6.3030702@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <506ADDA6.3030702@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: IETF v6ops list <v6ops@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] double nat
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: Tue, 02 Oct 2012 12:44:27 -0000

I always wondered how P2P applications react when forced to deal with 
multiple addressing realms. Example: one host sits behind CGN and 
another one behind the same CGN and a CPE NAT. Will we get hairpinning 
through outside NAT (= CGN)?

Any real-life experience with such a monstrosity?
Ivan

On 10/2/12 2:27 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> On 02/10/2012 11:13, Randy Bush wrote:
>> so, is double nat really worse than single nat?  is it formally
>> different?  except in the case of overlapping spaces, of course.
>>
>> draft-donley-nat444-impacts-04.txt seems to back off reports of
>> application issues.  anyone care to swing the clue by four as to
>> where multiple layers of nat are formally worse than one layer?
> If you think the referrals problem is serious, multiple NAT makes it
> worse by creating additional addressing realms.
>
> The probability of losing a session due to NAT state loss is presumably
> greater when there are more NATs on the path.
>
>     Brian
> _______________________________________________
> v6ops mailing list
> v6ops@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email