Flow-Based Identification of Failures Caused by IPv6 Transition Mechanisms

  • Vaibhav Bajpai
  • Nikolay Melnikov
  • Anuj Sehgal
  • Jürgen Schönwälder
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7279)

Abstract

The IETF has developed several solutions that promote IPv4 and IPv6 co-existence, but they need to be thoroughly tested on a large scale, before they can actually be considered as viable solutions. In the following study we present an experimental evaluation of the two popular transitioning technologies: NAT64 and Dual-Stack Lite. Our first goal is to identify how well current applications, protocols and online services interoperate with these technologies and to detect their potential failures. Our second goal is to use a stream-oriented flow query language NFQL, to formulate queries that can find those failures by scanning through traces of NetFlow records. We identified several applications that fail under NAT64, and we analyze how to detect these failures in an automated fashion.

Keywords

IPv6 Transition NAT64 Dual-Stack Lite NetFlow 

References

  1. 1.
    IPv6 Adoption Monitor, http://ipv6monitor.comcast.net/ (accessed February 10, 2012)
  2. 2.
    APNIC IPv4 Address Pool Reaches Final /8, http://www.apnic.net/publications/news/2011/final-8 (accessed February 10, 2012)
  3. 3.
    Available Pool of Unallocated IPv4 Internet Addresses Now Completely Emptied, http://www.icann.org/en/news/releases/release-03feb11-en.pdf (accessed February 10, 2012)
  4. 4.
    Arkko, J., Keranen, A.: Experiences from an IPv6-Only Network. Internet-Draft (draft-arkko-ipv6-only-experience-05) (February 2012)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hazeyama, H., Ueno, Y.: Experiences from an IPv6-Only Network in the WIDE Camp Autumn 2011. Internet-Draft (draft-hazeyama-widecamp-ipv6-only-experience-00) (October 2011)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Skoberne, N., Ciglaric, M.: Practical Evaluation of Stateful NAT64/DNS64 Translation. Advances in Electrical and Computer Engineering 11(3), 49–54 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Marinov, V., Schönwälder, J.: Design of a Stream-Based IP Flow Record Query Language. In: Bartolini, C., Gaspary, L.P. (eds.) DSOM 2009. LNCS, vol. 5841, pp. 15–28. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kanev, K., Melnikov, N., Schönwälder, J.: Implementation of a Stream-Based IP Flow Record Query Language. In: Stiller, B., De Turck, F. (eds.) AIMS 2010. LNCS, vol. 6155, pp. 147–158. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Durand, A., Droms, R., Woodyatt, J., Lee, Y.: Dual-Stack Lite Broadband Deployments Following IPv4 Exhaustion. RFC 6333 (August 2011)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Rekhter, Y., Moskowitz, B., Karrenberg, D., de Groot, G.J., Lear, E.: Address Allocation for Private Internets. RFC 1918 (Best Current Practice) (February 1996)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bagnulo, M., Matthews, P., van Beijnum, I.: Stateful NAT64: Network Address and Protocol Translation from IPv6 Clients to IPv4 Servers. RFC 6146 (April 2011)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Li, X., Bao, C., Baker, F.: IP/ICMP Translation Algorithm. RFC 6145 (April 2011)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bagnulo, M., Sullivan, A., Matthews, P., van Beijnum, I.: DNS64: DNS Extensions for Network Address Translation from IPv6 Clients to IPv4 Servers. RFC 6147 (April 2011)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Claise, B.: Cisco Systems NetFlow Services Export Version 9. RFC 3954 (October 2004)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Schauer, J.: Flowy 2.0: Fast Execution of Stream based IP Flow Queries. Bachelor’s thesis, Jacobs University Bremen, Campus Ring 1, 28759 Bremen, Germany (May 2011)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Allen, J.F.: Maintaining Knowledge about Temporal Intervals. Communications of the ACM 26, 832–843 (1983)MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    The totd (’Trick Or Treat Daemon’) DNS proxy, http://www.dillema.net/software/totd.html (accessed Februrary 10, 2012)
  18. 18.
    Perreault, S., Dionne, J.-P., Blanchet, M.: Ecdysis: Open-Source DNS64 and NAT64. In: AsiaBSDCon (March 2010)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Rosenberg, J., Schulzrinne, H., Camarillo, G., Johnston, A., Peterson, J., Sparks, R., Handley, M., Schooler, E.: SIP: Session Initiation Protocol. RFC 3261 (June 2002)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Schulzrinne, H., Casner, S.: RTP Profile for Audio and Video Conferences with Minimal Control. RFC 3551 (Standard) (July 2003)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Cisco IOS Flexible NetFlow Technology White Paper. White paper, Cisco Systems (September 2008)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Huston, G.: Transitioning Protocols. The Internet Protocol Journal 14(1), 22–46 (2011)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    TAYGA, Simple, No-fuss NAT64 for Linux, http://www.litech.org/tayga/ (accessed February 10, 2012)
  24. 24.
    Bush, R.: The Address plus Port (A+P) Approach to the IPv4 Address Shortage. RFC 6346 (August 2011)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Yamagata, I., Shirasaki, Y., Nakagawa, A., Yamaguchi, J., Ashida, H.: NAT444. Internet-Draft (draft-shirasaki-nat444-05) (January 2012)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Huitema, C.: Teredo: Tunneling IPv6 over UDP through Network Address Translations (NATs). RFC 4380 (February 2006)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Vaibhav Bajpai
    • 1
  • Nikolay Melnikov
    • 1
  • Anuj Sehgal
    • 1
  • Jürgen Schönwälder
    • 1
  1. 1.Computer ScienceJacobs University Bremen, GermanyBremenGermany

Personalised recommendations