nanog mailing list archives

Re: Big Temporary Networks


From: Måns Nilsson <mansaxel () besserwisser org>
Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2012 14:46:07 +0200

Subject: Re: Big Temporary Networks Date: Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 09:22:01PM +0900 Quoting Masataka Ohta (mohta () 
necom830 hpcl titech ac jp):
Måns Nilsson wrote:

And get v6.

Do not NAT. When all those people want to do social networking to the same
furry BBS while also frequenting three social app sites simultaneously
you are going to get Issues if you NAT. So don't.

Don't?

Considering that, ten years ago, some computers were still often
shared by thousands of people distinguished by their port numbers
and that, today, pseudo ISPs are using NAT, it is not only wrong
but also impossible to identify a user only by his IP address
without port numbers.

Ohta-san, 

I am not suggesting that. I'm just trying to point out that there
might be a bunch of assumptions that aren't as true anymore when a
lot of client connections share both source and destination address,
and perhaps also destination port. If this happens simultaneously when
a large amount of other tcp connections are NATed through the same box,
resource starvation will occur. If public address space is available,
it is better to use that. Also, no NAT means there will be no session
timers for things like long lived low bandwidth tcp sessions.

-- 
Måns Nilsson     primary/secondary/besserwisser/machina
MN-1334-RIPE                             +46 705 989668
I think my career is ruined!

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Current thread: