Subject: [bmwg] An improved version of our I-D: draft-lencse-bmwg-benchmarking-stateful-03

From: Gábor LENCSE <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2022 16:49:17 +0100

Dear Chairs and BMWG List Members,

We have made the following changes:

    Added Section 4.3 about the consideration of the cases of stateful
    operation.

    Consistency checking.  Removal of some parts obsoleted by the
    previous re-writing of Section 4.4.

    Added Section 4.7 about the method for measuring connection tear down
    rate.

    Updates for Section 5 about the implementation and experience.

Not included in the draft, but I have already done some actual 
measurements for the connection tear down rate of Jool. And I also plan 
to do some such measurement with iptables.

We would like to present the novelties of our draft (and also some new 
measurement results) at the BMWG meeting of IETF 113.

Best regards

Gábor

-------- Továbbított üzenet --------
Tárgy: 	New Version Notification for 
draft-lencse-bmwg-benchmarking-stateful-03.txt
Dátum: 	Fri, 04 Mar 2022 07:33:06 -0800
Feladó: 	[email-masked]
Címzett: 	Gabor Lencse <[email-masked]>, Keiichi Shima <[email-masked]>

A new version of I-D, draft-lencse-bmwg-benchmarking-stateful-03.txt
has been successfully submitted by Gabor Lencse and posted to the
IETF repository.

Name: draft-lencse-bmwg-benchmarking-stateful
Revision: 03
Title: Benchmarking Methodology for Stateful NATxy Gateways using RFC 
4814 Pseudorandom Port Numbers
Document date: 2022-03-04
Group: Individual Submission
Pages: 16
URL: 
https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-lencse-bmwg-benchmarking-stateful-03.txt
Status: 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-lencse-bmwg-benchmarking-stateful/
Htmlized: 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-lencse-bmwg-benchmarking-stateful
Diff: 
https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-lencse-bmwg-benchmarking-stateful-03

Abstract:
RFC 2544 has defined a benchmarking methodology for network
interconnect devices. RFC 5180 addressed IPv6 specificities and it
also provided a technology update, but excluded IPv6 transition
technologies. RFC 8219 addressed IPv6 transition technologies,
including stateful NAT64. However, none of them discussed how to
apply RFC 4814 pseudorandom port numbers to any stateful NAT (NAT44,
NAT64, NAT66) technologies. We discuss why using pseudorandom port
numbers with stateful NAT gateways is a hard problem and recommend a
solution.

The IETF Secretariat