Thank you! > One thing I have been wondering about is if the TRex side gets confused and Jool is actually ok. If that is the case then I apologise!
Well, who knows. I'm thinking that, if a normal Linux router would pass a similar test but a NAT64 Linux with Jool doesn't, then there should in theory be something that can be done. > What would be the best way to check that? Massive pcaps? I will compile a version with a bunch of timestamp tracking and see if we can get some conclusions out of it. Working... On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 5:24 AM, Sander Steffann <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > > Okay, guys. Prototype ready. I didn't test a gazillion connections, but > as far as basic functionality goes, it looks stable. Don't quote me on > that, though. > > > > Experimental branch in fake-nat64, in case anyone wants to try it out: > https://github.com/NICMx/Jool/tree/fake-nat64 > > Sorry, it still collapses :( > > I recorded a small test here: http://www.steffann.nl/sander/ > Fake%20NAT64%20collapse.mov > > The behaviour is really strange. One thing I have been wondering about is > if the TRex side gets confused and Jool is actually ok. If that is the case > then I apologise! What would be the best way to check that? Massive pcaps? > > Cheers, > Sander > >
_______________________________________________ Jool-list mailing list [email protected] https://mail-lists.nic.mx/listas/listinfo/jool-list
