> is the setup above feasible for networks with several thousand users > (between 5-10k)
Performance-wise, as a developer, I don't really have a means to test that level of traffic. Maybe somebody else in the list has that information. Functionality-wise though, Jool won't stop you. Just make sure that you have enough IPv4 transport addresses to mask all of that. Also, I'd suggest that you keep a decent understanding of this: https://jool.mx/en/usr-flags-pool4.html#--max-iterations > is there a latency induced for throughputs of more than a gb ? Not that I know of. (Why would that happen?) > exists the possibility of defining a pool of ipv4 addresses when > nat64-ing and not doing 1-to-1 specific rules ? Yes: https://jool.mx/en/pool4.html On Sat, Aug 11, 2018 at 1:35 PM Petre Tudor <[email protected]> wrote: > > hello > > i am trying to minimize the usage of the ipv4 addresses by assigning to > the users only ipv6 and nat64-ing them to the internet. (the final goal > would be to assign routable ipv4 only to those users who really need > them and pay them as an extra service; the normal users who don't have > specific requirements will only receive an ipv6 address and get nat64 > for the only-ipv4 destinations. > > before i start i have a few questions regarding the jool features > (please excuse if they are too trivial, I am new in this knowledge area): > > - is the setup above feasible for networks with several thousand users > (between 5-10k) > > - is there a latency induced for throughputs of more than a gb ? > > - exists the possibility of defining a pool of ipv4 addresses when > nat64-ing and not doing 1-to-1 specific rules ? > > > thanks, > > > petre > > _______________________________________________ > Jool-list mailing list > [email protected] > https://mail-lists.nic.mx/listas/listinfo/jool-list _______________________________________________ Jool-list mailing list [email protected] https://mail-lists.nic.mx/listas/listinfo/jool-list
