NAT444 or ?
davei at otd.com
Wed Sep 7 20:21:35 UTC 2011
On 9/7/2011 3:24 PM, Seth Mos wrote:
> I think you have the numbers off, he started with 1000 users sharing the same IP, since you can only do 62k sessions or so and with a "normal" timeout on those sessions you ran into issues quickly.
Remember that a TCP session is defined not just by the port, but by the
combination of source address:source port:destination
address:destination port. So that's 62k sessions *per destination* per
ip address. In theory, this particular performance problem should only
arise when the NAT gear insists on a unique port per session (which is
common, but unnecessary) or when a particular destination is
inordinately popular; the latter problem could be addressed by
increasing the number of addresses that facebook.com and google.com
I'm not advocating CGN; my point is not that this problem *should* be
solved, merely that it *can* be.
More information about the NANOG