[Jool-list] BIB-less NAT64

[Alberto Leiva]

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 <sander at steffann.nl> 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
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail-lists.nic.mx/pipermail/jool-list/attachments/20170915/86fb52bf/attachment.html>