Recently I got from cisco presentation about ISM.
Bulk port allocation was planned for the release 4.2.1.
But I am not sure if regulator can send port number with IP address.
Without port number bulk port allocation will be useless feature.
Ruslan Pustovoitov пишет:
I know Alcatel has Bulk
But I am not sure if regulator can send port number with IP address.
Without port number bulk port allocation will be useless feature.
This is why RFC6302 was written (http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6302).
The source port will be required for any law enforcement or abuse case,
because a
In Russia the situation with law enforsement is simpler at least with
real IP addresses.
Now we insert prism into ligthpath between neighbor's SFP/XFP in point
where regulator wont and send to their equipment all traffic without
saving flows information in database.
I hope with NAT situation
The question was what strategy of NAT deployment can be accepted by
large ISP if one of the internal condition to use only cisco boxes for NAT ?
Hidden cost was always visible to engeneers )
Now It is time to pay )
Has cisco plan to announce in next two year sucsessor of ISM-100 with
better
Actually in our 3G network, we use the 7609 (two ACE modules) for the NAT,
in the live situation, we had 4M users.
It is quite stable for now.
Also we bought the ASR9K to expand the 3G network, maybe will migrate the
NAT to ASR9K.
Xu Hu
2012/3/14 Ruslan Pustovoitov ru...@mostelekom.net
The
Hi,
On Wed, 14 Mar 2012, Xu Hu wrote:
Actually in our 3G network, we use the 7609 (two ACE modules) for the NAT,
in the live situation, we had 4M users.
It is quite stable for now.
Also we bought the ASR9K to expand the 3G network, maybe will migrate the
NAT to ASR9K.
I am curios if and if
We in europe have some pressure to have the ability to map the
ip/port/timestamp
touple back to user. Of course nobody will be able to deliver the port
together
with the ip and an accurate enough timestamp for this to be meaningfull.
Bulk Port Allocation (also called Port Range Allocation)
Does this question not worry community ?
Ruslan Pustovoytov пишет:
Hi all
Does anybody explain me what is the best way to do CGN on Cisco boxes ?
I look for powerfull solution with price congruous with other vendor.
Recently I closely looked at ISM-100 card for asr9k platform.
I was negativly
Hi,
On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 07:01:10PM +0400, Ruslan Pustovoitov wrote:
Does this question not worry community ?
I think it's great that the hidden costs that come with running IPv4
now start being openly visible...
Sorry, what was the question?
gert
--
USENET is *not* the non-clickable part
Hi,
On Tue, 13 Mar 2012, Gert Doering wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 07:01:10PM +0400, Ruslan Pustovoitov wrote:
Does this question not worry community ?
I think it's great that the hidden costs that come with running IPv4
now start being openly visible...
next let's think about the
Hi,
On Tuesday 13 March 2012 16:01:10 Ruslan Pustovoitov wrote:
Card is occupied full slot in chassis and costs about 200.000$ in GPL
with license for 10 miilion sessions.
I know that other vendors with more ancient NATs has double
performance for this price.
Also, I look in CGSE
Hi all
Does anybody explain me what is the best way to do CGN on Cisco boxes ?
I look for powerfull solution with price congruous with other vendor.
Recently I closely looked at ISM-100 card for asr9k platform.
I was negativly surprised that performance of this card is about 10
Gbit/s
12 matches
Mail list logo
