Message info
 
To:Cameron Byrne From:Joel jaeggli Subject:Re: [BEHAVE] draft-sivakumar-behave-edm-harmful comments Date:Sun, 18 Mar 2012 08:58:02 -0700
 

I'm not sure what to think if this draft.

The way I read it some load balancer deployments that I currently have
are considered harmful. that may well be but they meet my needs so
there's a question of scope. not all edm devices sit between isp
customers and the internet.

On 3/10/12 05:50 , Cameron Byrne wrote:
...

> Trying to keep the math simple here, 64,000 available ports * 1024
> IPv4 addresses = 65.5 million sessions. Just as one data point, i
> cannot run my network on this allocation, assuming i put 100% of the
> allocation to CGN use.

If I don't have enough IPs to meet the requirement for a non-edm mapping
while fulfilling my other addressing needs with available resources I'm
going to overload, no matter what the draft says. If we would like to
provide advice that should be soundly ignored when necessary I'm not
sure what the value of the advice is.

_______________________________________________
Behave mailing list
Behave@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/behave