draft-ietf-v6ops-nat64-experience-03.txt   draft-ietf-v6ops-nat64-experience-04.txt 
Internet Engineering Task Force G. Chen Internet Engineering Task Force G. Chen
Internet-Draft Z. Cao Internet-Draft Z. Cao
Intended status: Informational China Mobile Intended status: Informational China Mobile
Expires: April 05, 2014 C. Xie Expires: April 17, 2014 C. Xie
China Telecom China Telecom
D. Binet D. Binet
France Telecom-Orange France Telecom-Orange
October 02, 2013 October 14, 2013
NAT64 Operational Experiences NAT64 Operational Experiences
draft-ietf-v6ops-nat64-experience-03 draft-ietf-v6ops-nat64-experience-04
Abstract Abstract
This document summarizes NAT64 function deployment scenarios and This document summarizes NAT64 function deployment scenarios and
operational experience. Both NAT64 Carrier Grade NAT (NAT64-CGN) and operational experience. Both NAT64 Carrier Grade NAT (NAT64-CGN) and
NAT64 server Front End (NAT64-FE) are considered in this document. NAT64 server Front End (NAT64-FE) are considered in this document.
Status of This Memo Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
skipping to change at page 1, line 36 skipping to change at page 1, line 36
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on April 05, 2014. This Internet-Draft will expire on April 17, 2014.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2013 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2013 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved. document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents publication of this document. Please review these documents
skipping to change at page 2, line 33 skipping to change at page 2, line 33
5.2. Geo-location . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 5.2. Geo-location . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
6. Quality of Experience . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 6. Quality of Experience . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
6.1. Service Reachability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 6.1. Service Reachability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
6.2. Resource Reservation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 6.2. Resource Reservation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
7. MTU Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 7. MTU Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
8. ULA Usages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 8. ULA Usages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
9. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 9. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
10. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 10. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
11. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 11. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
12. Additional Author List . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 12. Additional Author List . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
13. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 13. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
13.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 13.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
13.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 13.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Appendix A. Testing Results of Application Behavior . . . . . . 18 Appendix A. Testing Results of Application Behavior . . . . . . 18
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
IPv6 is the only sustainable solution for numbering nodes on Internet IPv6 is the only sustainable solution for numbering nodes on Internet
due to the IPv4 depletion. Network operators have to deploy due to the IPv4 depletion. Network operators have to deploy
IPv6-only networks in order to meet the needs of the expanding IPv6-only networks in order to meet the needs of the expanding
skipping to change at page 13, line 19 skipping to change at page 13, line 19
The use of ULAs could help in identifying the translation The use of ULAs could help in identifying the translation
traffic.[I-D.ietf-v6ops-ula-usage-recommendations] has provided traffic.[I-D.ietf-v6ops-ula-usage-recommendations] has provided
further guidance for the ULAs usages. further guidance for the ULAs usages.
We configure ULAs as NAT64 prefixes on a NAT64-CGN. If a host is We configure ULAs as NAT64 prefixes on a NAT64-CGN. If a host is
only assigned with an IPv6 address and connected to NAT64-CGN, when only assigned with an IPv6 address and connected to NAT64-CGN, when
connect to an IPv4 service, it would receive AAAA record generated by connect to an IPv4 service, it would receive AAAA record generated by
the DNS64 with the ULA prefix. A Global Unicast Address (GUA) will the DNS64 with the ULA prefix. A Global Unicast Address (GUA) will
be selected as the source address to the ULA destination address. be selected as the source address to the ULA destination address.
When the host has both IPv4 and IPv6 address, it would initiate both When the host has both IPv4 and IPv6 address, it would initiate both
A and AAAA record lookup may due to Happy Eyeballs [RFC6555], then A and AAAA record lookup, then both original A record and
both original A record and DNS64-generated AAAA record would be DNS64-generated AAAA record would be received. A host, which is
received. The host would prefer the AAAA record as the destination, compliant with [RFC6724], will never prefer ULA over IPv4. An IPv4
if the address selection process still follows the recommendation of path will be always selected. It may be undesirable because the
[RFC3484]. While, if the host implements the default policy table as NAT64-CGN will never be used. Operators may consider to add
defined in [RFC6724], since the IPv4 takes the precedence over ULA additional site-specific rows to the default table to steer traffic
(which is difference than [RFC3484]), an IPv4 path will be always flows going through NAT64-CGN. However, it involves significant
preferred. It may be undesirable because the traffic path is costs to change terminal's behavior. Therefore, operators are not
unexpected due to vary implementations on hosts. Operators have to suggested to configure ULAs on a NAT64-CGN.
make site-specific rules to gauge the host's behaviors, which may
likely add the operational complexity.
ULAs can't work when hosts transit the Internet to connect with ULAs can't work when hosts transit the Internet to connect with
NAT64. Therefore, ULAs are inapplicable to the case of NAT64-FE. NAT64. Therefore, ULAs are inapplicable to the case of NAT64-FE.
9. Security Considerations 9. Security Considerations
his document presents the deployment experiences of NAT64 in CGN and his document presents the deployment experiences of NAT64 in CGN and
FE scenarios. In general, RFC 6146[RFC6146] provides TCP-tracking, FE scenarios. In general, RFC 6146[RFC6146] provides TCP-tracking,
address-dependent filtering mechanisms to protect NAT64 from address-dependent filtering mechanisms to protect NAT64 from
Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS). In NAT64-CGN cases, operators Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS). In NAT64-CGN cases, operators
skipping to change at page 17, line 22 skipping to change at page 17, line 19
[I-D.donley-behave-deterministic-cgn] [I-D.donley-behave-deterministic-cgn]
Donley, C., Grundemann, C., Sarawat, V., Sundaresan, K., Donley, C., Grundemann, C., Sarawat, V., Sundaresan, K.,
and O. Vautrin, "Deterministic Address Mapping to Reduce and O. Vautrin, "Deterministic Address Mapping to Reduce
Logging in Carrier Grade NAT Deployments", draft-donley- Logging in Carrier Grade NAT Deployments", draft-donley-
behave-deterministic-cgn-06 (work in progress), July 2013. behave-deterministic-cgn-06 (work in progress), July 2013.
[I-D.ietf-softwire-4rd] [I-D.ietf-softwire-4rd]
Despres, R., Jiang, S., Penno, R., Lee, Y., Chen, G., and Despres, R., Jiang, S., Penno, R., Lee, Y., Chen, G., and
M. Chen, "IPv4 Residual Deployment via IPv6 - a Stateless M. Chen, "IPv4 Residual Deployment via IPv6 - a Stateless
Solution (4rd)", draft-ietf-softwire-4rd-06 (work in Solution (4rd)", draft-ietf-softwire-4rd-07 (work in
progress), July 2013. progress), October 2013.
[I-D.ietf-softwire-map-deployment] [I-D.ietf-softwire-map-deployment]
Sun, Q., Chen, M., Chen, G., Tsou, T., and S. Perreault, Sun, Q., Chen, M., Chen, G., Tsou, T., and S. Perreault,
"Mapping of Address and Port (MAP) - Deployment "Mapping of Address and Port (MAP) - Deployment
Considerations", draft-ietf-softwire-map-deployment-02 Considerations", draft-ietf-softwire-map-deployment-02
(work in progress), July 2013. (work in progress), July 2013.
[I-D.ietf-softwire-map-t] [I-D.ietf-softwire-map-t]
Li, X., Bao, C., Dec, W., Troan, O., Matsushima, S., and Li, X., Bao, C., Dec, W., Troan, O., Matsushima, S., and
T. Murakami, "Mapping of Address and Port using T. Murakami, "Mapping of Address and Port using
 End of changes. 7 change blocks. 
18 lines changed or deleted 16 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.41. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/