MAP-E

Baldur Norddahl baldur.norddahl at gmail.com
Sun Aug 4 22:24:38 UTC 2019


On Sat, Aug 3, 2019 at 11:30 AM JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG <
nanog at nanog.org> wrote:

>
>     > which again is not the case for 464XLAT/NAT64. Each user gets
>     > automatically as many ports as he needs at every moment.
>
>     Unless all the ports are used up.
>
> -> That's right, but you need to calculate a sufficient number of IPv4
> addresses for your pool
>

I view it as an operative benefit of MAP that it is very stable in regards
what happens if the ports are used up. This will never affect other users,
as it could with old fashioned CGN. And in fact, there is almost nothing
that could affect MAP but plenty of things that could go wrong with your
CGN.

In the case a user has a problem with too few available ports he will
contact our support. They will either advise him on what he can do to use
less ports (example, tell the user to do less bittorrent). Or they will
tell the user about the option of using IPv6 for his purpose or that he
could pay for a dedicated non shared IPv4 address. But they would never
need to escalate to have anything done to the non-existent CGN. Some might
not like it, but this is very sound from a business perspective.

Even the case of a DDoS attack. For my scheme with 16 users sharing an
IPv4, the attack could affect all 16 users. For CGN it is usually many
more. Or the case of Playstation network. Yes they WILL blacklist your CGN
just the same as they can blacklist a shared MAP ip address. Except it
affects more users. There is some advantage in having less dense usage of
the address space. As a site site probably has less than 1 out of 16 chance
of blacklisting someone, our support staff can solve a problem for a
customer by simply moving him to a different shared IPv4 - they could not
do that for a CGN solution, or if they could, the alternative would also be
blacklisted.

Regards,

Baldur
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20190805/4d0862eb/attachment.html>


More information about the NANOG mailing list