We have a PowerV4 router from linktechs and it rocks for our edge not
doing a lot with a 10G circuit and most of the network
I really like its flexibility and Horsepower.
On 01/15/2018 02:50 PM, Chuck McCown wrote:
Yes, we have 6000 now and are adding about 1000 each year.
*From:* Mathew Howard
*Sent:* Monday, January 15, 2018 1:47 PM
*To:* af
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] IPv4 exhaust again
I'm pretty sure he did mean 8000 subscribers... I would want one of
the i7 x86 boxes for that kind of load, but I'd imagine that would
handle it without any problems.
On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 2:35 PM, Adam Moffett <[email protected]> wrote:
I took him to mean subscribers when he said 8000 connections.
As far as Layer4 connections we're performing NAT for, I'm not
totally sure how to tell.
If I torch the LTE PDN interface, it counts up for awhile and then
freezes.
Connection tracking is showing something like 120,000 items but
that isn't strictly stuff we're NAT'ing. Some traffic just passes
through.
------ Original Message ------
From: "Steve Jones" <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Sent: 1/15/2018 2:21:54 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] IPv4 exhaust again
srcnat is what we use. 1800 connections right now from one
section of the network
On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 1:10 PM, Chuck McCown <[email protected]>
wrote:
What flavor of NAT does mikrotik implement?
*From:* Chuck McCown
*Sent:* Monday, January 15, 2018 12:07 PM
*To:* [email protected]
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] IPv4 exhaust again
Wonder how heavy we can load that... I would want it to be
able to handle 8000 connections.
*From:* Steve Jones
*Sent:* Monday, January 15, 2018 12:05 PM
*To:* [email protected]
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] IPv4 exhaust again
ccr1072
On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 12:59 PM, Chuck McCown
<[email protected]> wrote:
What are you using? Router NAT or a server or ?
*From:* Steve Jones
*Sent:* Monday, January 15, 2018 11:48 AM
*To:* [email protected]
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] IPv4 exhaust again
Im not going to lie, we are natting at 1:300 across a
handful of publics and have little to no issue, though we
really should since the customer router double NATs
On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 12:39 PM, Chuck McCown
<[email protected]> wrote:
I need to have about /19 worth of customers natted to
as few V4s as is needed to make it work properly.
We currently have about 3 /21s I think. Don’t want
to have to buy a fourth.
*From:* Dennis Burgess
*Sent:* Monday, January 15, 2018 11:34 AM
*To:* [email protected]
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] IPv4 exhaust again
Mikrotik can do that, I have a router with 20k NAT
rules natting two /21s to less than 254 ips .:)
*/_Dennis Burgess_/**–**Network Solution Engineer –
Consultant ***
MikroTik Certified Trainer/Consultant
<http://www.linktechs.net/productcart/pc/viewcontent.asp?idpage=5>
– MTCNA, MTCRE, MTCWE, MTCTCE, MTCINE
For Wireless Hardware/Routers visit www.linktechs.net
<http://www.linktechs.net/>
Radio Frequency Coverages: www.towercoverage.com
<http://www.towercoverage.com/>
Office: 314-735-0270 <tel:%28314%29%20735-0270>
E-Mail: [email protected]
*From:*Af [mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of
*George Skorup
*Sent:* Monday, January 15, 2018 12:28 PM
*To:* [email protected]
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] IPv4 exhaust again
Dual-stack and CGN? You can get 8:1, 16:1 or even
32:1 out of a single public IPv4 address. Give 8
customers 8k ports each, or 16 customer 4k ports
each, 32 customers 2k ports each. That's *source*
ports, so they're not limited to 8k, 4k or 2k
connections total. You have to look at in both
directions. 10.10.10.10:1024
<http://10.10.10.10:1024> -> 8.8.8.8:53
<http://8.8.8.8:53> and 10.10.10.10:1024
<http://10.10.10.10:1024> -> 8.8.4.4:53
<http://8.8.4.4:53> mappings are both valid, and it
obviously goes a lot deeper than that.
Seems to be a whole lot easier than some crazy NAT
appliance that's running the whole network. I haven't
done anything like this, but I'm considering it. I
think Juniper even lets you do this with a couple
commands? Yeah, I'm too cheap for that.
Something else to keep in mind is that most consumer
grade routers still have a fairly limited connection
table. My Cambium cnPilot router I have at home lets
you adjust the max table size (up to 8192). Most are
2k or 4k. While even a low-end MikroTik will give you
>100k.
On 1/15/2018 11:35 AM, Chuck McCown wrote:
Planning to buy another /21 or some such thing
.... again ......
�
So going to attempt to NAT the whole frigging
company.
�
Seems like I am going in reverse here.
�
If we can make NAT work for most customers, then
that will buy us time to build our magic V4
translator gateway box for a V6 only network.�
�
Any suggestions on the best way to do this?
--
