Hi Prasad, I lost the context whether this specific point was discussed in behave where 8158 started. However, I don't see any similar tracking in relevant specs that were developed at the time (RFC8512 (here in OPSAWG), CGN Requirements (RFC6888, in behave), NAT-MIB (RFC7659, behave), RFC8513 (in softwire)). All the policies are related to NAT-specific resources, not throughput/rate for specific BIB/Mapping.
I add Dan (co-chair of behave) in case he still has the context. If the throughput IEs are needed, what prevents you from exporting based on the internal realm? Cheers, Med De : Prasad Yadati <yprasad=40juniper....@dmarc.ietf.org> Envoyé : vendredi 1 novembre 2024 21:14 À : opsawg@ietf.org Cc : repe...@cisco.com; ssent...@cisco.com Objet : [OPSAWG]Proposal to Enhance IPFIX NAT Logging with pps/bps Metrics for Improved Flow Monitoring Dear OPSAWG Members and RFC 8158 Authors, I hope this message finds you well. I would like to start by acknowledging the excellent work done on RFC 8158, which has standardized IPFIX Information Elements (IEs) for NAT Event Logging. This document provides essential logging capabilities for Network Address Translation (NAT) events and has been invaluable for ensuring consistency in NAT event tracking across network devices. As a potential enhancement to this RFC, I propose the inclusion of packets per second (pps) and bits per second (bps) metrics for each NAT flow. The goal is to provide more detailed insights into NAT flow behavior, particularly to identify FAT flows that consume excessive bandwidth or hijack available throughput. Motivation: While RFC 8158 efficiently logs critical NAT session events (e.g., creation and deletion), it lacks specific metrics related to throughput that would allow operators to understand real-time bandwidth consumption of individual NAT flows. Adding pps and bps to the existing template would enable operators to: * Detect and manage FAT flows that consume excessive bandwidth. * Monitor throughput per NAT flow to identify potential bottlenecks or misbehaving flows. * Improve operational efficiency by reducing the overhead on collectors, allowing NAT devices or IPFIX exporters to compute and export throughput values directly. * Enhance network management by correlating throughput metrics with NAT events like session creation and deletion. Proposed Additions to the IPFIX Template: To extend the current template, I propose adding the following new IEs: 1. PacketsPerSecond (pps): The number of packets transmitted per second for a given NAT flow. * Type: Float or Integer * Formula: Calculated from packetDeltaCount divided by flow duration (flowEndSysUpTime - flowStartSysUpTime). 1. BitsPerSecond (bps): The number of bits transmitted per second for a given NAT flow. * Type: Float or Integer * Formula: Calculated by converting octetTotalCount to bits (octets * 8) and dividing by flow duration (flowEndSysUpTime - flowStartSysUpTime). These metrics would add visibility into real-time performance of NAT flows, allowing operators to better manage high-bandwidth flows and mitigate congestion before it becomes an issue. Integration with Existing IEs: The new IEs would integrate seamlessly with RFC 8158's current elements: * Session Creation (natEvent): Remains unchanged but now includes throughput metrics for each session. * Session Deletion (natEvent): Could include throughput values at the end of the session, giving a complete view of flow behavior. * octetTotalCount and packetDeltaCount: Existing IEs can serve to calculate the new pps and bps values. This extended logging provides both an event-based and performance-based view of NAT flows, enabling network operators to optimize traffic, apply QoS measures, and prevent bandwidth hogging. Rationale: While pps and bps can technically be derived from octetTotalCount, packetDeltaCount, and flow timestamps, separate IEs offer several advantages: 1. Pre-processed Data for Real-Time Monitoring: Exporting pre-calculated pps and bps values reduces processing overhead on collectors, especially in high-flow environments. 2. Reduced Overhead on Collectors: By offloading computations to NAT devices, collectors can focus on aggregation and analysis, improving scalability in high-traffic environments. 3. Timely, Accurate Data from NAT Devices: Devices exporting real-time pps and bps provide accurate, up-to-date data, reducing error risk in post-collection calculations. 4. Standardization and Uniformity: Standardizing pps and bps in IPFIX templates ensures consistency across NAT devices and exporters, preventing discrepancies. 5. Simplified Analysis: Including pps and bps in exports makes key throughput metrics immediately available, facilitating troubleshooting. Conclusion: Adding pps and bps metrics to IPFIX NAT logging would enhance network operators' capabilities in managing networks, providing granular visibility into NAT flows and enabling effective traffic shaping. These enhancements would also reduce the processing load on collectors, improving scalability and performance. Thank you for considering this proposal. I welcome any feedback from the working group and the authors of RFC 8158 and am open to collaboration on refining these enhancements. Regards yp Juniper Business Use Only ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration, Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci. This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law; they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments. As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified. Thank you.
_______________________________________________ OPSAWG mailing list -- opsawg@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to opsawg-le...@ietf.org