Mixing Heterogeneous Address Spaces in a Single Edge Network
The growth of IPv4 Internet has been facing the infamous IP address depletion barrier. In practice, typical IPv4 Internet edge networks can be expanded by incorporating private addresses and NAT devices.
In this paper, major limitations of NAT-expanded private networks are presented. Furthermore, a solution is proposed to encourage the mixed usage of private and public IP addresses in a single edge network domain. The solution comprises of two key ideas : super-subnet mask and shared NAT. Super-subnet mask removes the routing boundary between private and public hosts. Shared NAT saves public IP address resources by sharing them among several private networks. These ideas not only encourage the coexistence of heterogeneous address classes, but also lead to efficient sharing of global IP addresses.
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.Srisuresh, P., Egevang, K.: Traditional IP Network Address Translator (Traditional NAT). RFC 3022 (Informational) (2001)Google Scholar
- 2.Srisuresh, P., Holdrege, M.: IP Network Address Translator (NAT) Terminology and Considerations. RFC 2663 (Proposed Standard) (1999)Google Scholar
- 3.Buddhikot, M., Hari, A., Singh, K., Miller, S.: Mobilenat: a new technique for mobility across heterogeneous address spaces. In: WMASH 2003: Proceedings of the 1st ACM international workshop on Wireless mobile applications and services on WLAN hotspots, pp. 75–84. ACM Press, New York (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 4.Borella, M., Montenegro, G.: Rsip: Address sharing with end-to-end security (2000)Google Scholar
- 5.Borella, M., Grabelsky, D., Lo, J., Taniguchi, K.: Realm Specific IP: Protocol Specification. Internet Engineering Task Force: RFC 3103 (2001)Google Scholar
- 8.Walfish, M., Stribling, J., Krohn, M., Balakrishnan, H., Morris, R., Shenker, S.: Middleboxes no longer considered harmful. MIT Technical Report TR/954 (2004)Google Scholar