G
> Reply-To: Vasilenko Eduard
> Date: Friday, March 25, 2022 at 11:17 AM
> To: Jared Brown , "nanog@nanog.org"
> Subject: RE: MAP-T (was: Re: V6 still not supported)
>
>Hi Jared,
>Theoretically, MAP is better. But
>
>1. Nobody has implemented i
of Vasilenko
Eduard via NANOG
Reply-To: Vasilenko Eduard
Date: Friday, March 25, 2022 at 11:17 AM
To: Jared Brown , "nanog@nanog.org"
Subject: RE: MAP-T (was: Re: V6 still not supported)
Hi Jared,
Theoretically, MAP is better. But
1. Nobody has implemented it for
It comes from actual measurements in residential networks that already offer
IPv6.
In typical residential networks, a very high % of the traffic is
Google/Youtube, Netflix, Facebook, CDNs, etc., which all are IPv6 enabled.
Typically, is also similar in mobile networks, and this has been confirm
It appears that JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG
said:
>At the end, if you turn on IPv6 to residential customers, typically you will
>get 70-80% IPv6 traffic, so the state in the NAT64 using 464XLAT is lower and
>lower every day.
Not disagreeing, but where does that number come from? Anectodall
Jordi -
Very nice indeed! Please pass along my thanks to your coauthors for
this most excellent (and badly needed) document!
:-)
/John
> On 25 Mar 2022, at 4:53 PM, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG
> wrote:
>
> The cost of deploying MAP in CPEs is a bit higher than 464XLAT, which i
]
Sent: Saturday, March 26, 2022 12:44 AM
To: Vasilenko Eduard ; Jared Brown
; nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: MAP-T (was: Re: V6 still not supported)
FWIW, MAP has been deployed by few operators (in at least 3 continents that I
am aware of).
Charter communications is one of the public references
The cost of deploying MAP in CPEs is a bit higher than 464XLAT, which is not an
issue anyway. There are several open source implementations for both of them.
It is true that MAP avoids state in the network, however, it means higher
"cost" for users in terms of restrictions of ports. It also mean
Hi Jared,
Theoretically, MAP is better. But
1. Nobody has implemented it for the router.
The code for the CGNAT engine gives the same cost/performance.
No promised advantage from potentially stateless protocol.
2.MAP needs much bigger address space (not everybody has) because:
a) powered-off sub
8 matches
Mail list logo
