Hello Aberto, Jordi
many thanks for the quick and detailed answers @Alberto - actually the resources usage was the next question, but you answered already; it looks like I found the software which does what I need, the rest is in the details of the implementation. @Jordi - the whole idea is thought for the residential users of an emerging isp, as an attempt to minimise the ipv4 usage and also to easily implement ipv6; the idea is in the early stages, but I imagine something like a linux gateway running jool in front of an ipv6-only network (ip's are assigned via pppoe), through which all uses exit; those visiting ipv6 sites, go directly and those requesting ipv4-only sites will be nat64-ed. I am fully aware that a solution which covers 100% of the possible cases is utopic, but I am happy if I can cover the normal cases; for the "exotic" ones I could always assign an ipv4 via the dual stack pppoe and solve the problem (these being the exceptions and not the rule) many thanks again for answering so quick on a saturday evening, cheers, petre On 8/11/2018 21:27, Alberto Leiva wrote: > These don't really address your first question directly, but might > serve as a reference point. They are everything I managed to collect > that is both public and refers to performance: > > (https://mail-lists.nic.mx/pipermail/jool-list/2018-July/000199.html) > First off, you're definitively not hitting the performance limit of Jool - it > easily scales to multiple Gb/s of throughput. There must be something else > that is causing your issues. > > (https://mail-lists.nic.mx/pipermail/jool-list/2017-October/000158.html) > Jool, even 3.5.4 Jool, withstands T-Rex's torture traffic without > flinching. There are no significant performance issues to worry about. CPU > usage is at 1% at worst and there are no packet drops. > ... > I can now say fairly confidently that Jool is pretty darn > fast, even without the latest performance tweaks applied, as evidenced from > the fact that, now that whatever was hobbling before is gone, it is pretty > clear that Jool can keep up to at least this configuration of T-Rex with > flying colors. > > (https://mail-lists.nic.mx/pipermail/jool-list/2016-September/000091.html) >> What is the CPU load on the x86 SIIT-BRs from Jool? > Our are practically idle. They are translating about 100Mb/s of mostly > web traffic. The hardware is quite old even, Sun X4170s with 2x > quad-core Intel L5520 CPUs. Less than a quarter of a single CPU core is > used for the entire system (so not only Jool), the remaining 7.75 CPU > cores are idle. > > -------- > > BTW: We're currently working on a performance bug that affects packets > that never traverse physical interfaces: > https://github.com/NICMx/Jool/issues/267 > On Sat, Aug 11, 2018 at 1:50 PM Alberto Leiva <[email protected]> wrote: >>> 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
