* Time table / log | When? | What? | Notes | | 2019-02-21 | Kick-Off | x | | | Finish all admin points | x | | | Know when/how to coordinate | x | | 2019-02-21 | Clarifications Ueli Maurer (Mentor) | x | | | Write mail / phone | x | | 2019-02-22 | Have all papers handed in | | | | | | | 2019-02-23 | python2 / ipaddress is buggy | | | | p4utils is python2 only support | | | | bmpy_utils is not installable with pip | | | | python2 / latest ipaddress==1.0.22 still has the bug | | | | ipaddress.ip_network("2001:db8:61::/64") | | | | IPv6Network(u'3230:3031:3a64:6238:3a36:313a:3a2f:3634/128') | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 2019-02-28 | Meet Laurent #2 | | | | - Parser for all protocols (udp,tcp,icmp,icmp6) | | | | | | | | | | | 2019-02-22 | Have rough definition of tasks | | | 2019-03-01 | Feature list / priority list / roadmap clear | | | 2019-03-08 | NAT46 1:1 table TCP/UDP working | | | 2019-03-15 | NAT46 1:1 table ICMP, ICMPv6 working | | | | Will need some switch local ip addresses | | | | | | | 2019-03-29 | Jool SIIT / range / offset support https://www.jool.mx/en/run-vanilla.html | | | | Jool EAMT support https://www.jool.mx/en/run-eam.html | | | | Bidirectional support | | | | Will need IPv6 embedding suport https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6052 | | | | | | | 2019-04-05 | NAT64 prefix based IPv6->IPv4 conversion [tayga] | | | | Use case: IPv6 hosts send to specific /96 | | | | | | | 2019-04-19 | NAT64 dynamic pool implementation: n:m ipv6 to ipv4 mapping | | | | And n:1 stateful mappings https://www.jool.mx/en/run-nat64.html | | | | Needs active controller | | | | Needs timeout / leases | | | 2019-05-10 | Benmarking results between P4, Jool, Tayga | | | | Real hardware of advantage | | | | | | | 2019-08-01 | Latest start writing documentation | | | 2019-08-21 | hand in thesis | | * Topics / Tasks ** Admin *** DONE Clarify PDF / form with Denise Spicher: free form description *** TODO Create task description to be handed in mystudies *** DONE Create list of tasks / initial brainstorming *** TODO Get OK from Ueli Maurer that thesis is valid in Information Security Area *** TODO Find out how-when-whom-where to meet / define schedule *** TODO Latex and/or org-mode for the thesis? *** TODO Add initial milestones **** 180d plan **** 25w ** Thesis implementation *** DONE Setup test VM for P4: 2a0a:e5c0:2:12:400:f0ff:fea9:c3e3 *** DONE Get feature list of jool *** DONE Get feature list of tayga *** DONE Setup P4 base / structure *** DONE Create minimal controller for populating tables *** TODO Checkout / review egress settings *** TODO Implement ICMP <-> ICMP6 translation **** DONE Parse icmp **** DONE Parse icmpv6 **** TODO Add (static) egress configuration **** TODO Translate icmp <-> icmp6 **** TODO Create table entry for mapping v4->v6 [net] **** TODO Create table entry for mapping v6->v4 [net] *** TODO Setup test VM [dual stack] for Jool: *** TODO Setup test VM [dual stack] for tayga: *** NAT64/NAT46 Features in jool and tayga **** TODO Static 1:1 NAT46: translate from IPv4 to IPv6 with a table ***** TODO TCP ***** TODO UDP ***** TODO ICMP <-> ICMPv6 **** TODO Stateless Prefix based NAT64: IPv6 to IPv4 translation prefix based ***** Allows IPv6 hosts to reach the IPv4 Internet **** See time table above *** Additional features queue (to be discussed) **** TODO Offset based translation (v4->v6) -> same as range (?) **** TODO IP address learning (v6/v4) for real life switch? ** Thesis documentation *** Motivation TBD *** Translation mechanisms - v4 to v6 / vice versa - Stateful / stateless - static / dynamic **** Explicit Address Mappings Table (EAMT) Range based mapping tables See https://www.jool.mx/en/eamt.html, https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7757 *** Current state of the art tayga/jool TBD **** Tayga - Single threaded - Multi threaded work started due to initiative of ungleich / Chrisrock [IPv6.chat] **** Jool - EAMT bidirectional only (!) IPtables interaction ``` user@T:~# # Create a Jool iptables instance named "example." user@T:~# # Also, establish that the IPv6 representation of any IPv4 address should be user@T:~# # `2001:db8::`. (See sections below for examples.) user@T:~# jool_siit instance add "example" --iptables --pool6 2001:db8::/96 user@T:~# user@T:~# # Tell iptables which traffic should be handled by our newly-created instance: user@T:~# user@T:~# # IPv6: only packets from 2001:db8::198.51.100.8/125 to 2001:db8::192.0.2 user@T:~# ip6tables -t mangle -A PREROUTING \ > -s 2001:db8::198.51.100.8/125 -d 2001:db8::192.0.2.0/120 \ > -j JOOL_SIIT --instance "example" user@T:~# # IPv4: Only packets from 192.0.2 to 198.51.100.8/29 user@T:~# iptables -t mangle -A PREROUTING \ > -s 192.0.2.0/24 -d 198.51.100.8/29 \ > -j JOOL_SIIT --instance "example" ``` 5656 **** Cisco (?) *** P4 based implementation TBD **** General - IPv6 subnet 2001:db8::/32 - IPv6 hosts are in 2001:db8:6::/64 - IPv6 default router (::/0) is 2001:db8:6::42/64 - IPv4 mapped Internet "NAT64 prefix" 2001:db8:4444::/96 (should go into a table) - IPv4 hosts are in 10.0.4.0/24 - IPv6 in IPv4 mapped hosts are in 10.0.6.0/24 - IPv4 default router = 10.0.0.42 **** Static mappings - likely need table(s) - need tcp & udp translation ***** Hosts ****** Left side: IPv6 ****** Right side: IPv4 **** Requirements - *** Performance comparison *** Feature/Functionality difference / overview **** Not included - DNS64 - has already been solved in a different domain *** References / Follow up **** RFC 6052: https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6052 IPv6 Addressing of IPv4/IPv6 Translators **** RFC 6586 for deployment experiences using Stateful NAT64. **** RFC 7757 Explicit Address Mappings for Stateless IP/ICMP Translation **** EAMT/Jool: https://www.jool.mx/en/eamt.html * Proposal / task description ** Task description for mystudies *** High speed NAT64 with P4 Currently there are two main open source NAT64 solution available: tayga and jool. The former is a single threaded, cpu bound user space solution, the latter a custom Linux kernel module. This thesis challenges this status quo by developing a P4 based solution supporting all features of jool/tayga and comparing the performance, security and adaptivity of the solutions. - Milestone 1: Stateless NAT64/NAT46 translations in P4 - Milestone 2: Stateful (dynamic) NAT64/NAT46 translations - Milestone 3: Hardware adaption ** Original ideas Proposal 1: Automating NAT64 with P4 In IPv6 only data centers IPv4 connectivity is still a business requirement. Current state of the art methods include layer 7 proxying or static assignments. both featuring static assignments. A flexible, dynamic assignment of IPv4 addresses to IPv6 hosts, similar to lease times in DHCPv4 and prefix delegations in DHCPv6 could reduce the pressure on IPv4 addresses. I would suggest the develop of a new protocol (likely UDP embedded) that allows hosts to request on-network support for IPv4 addresses. As IPv4 addresses have to be treated as "expensive", an accounting metric has to be introduced. While in the business world this is usually related to money, in the network world IPv4 users could be paying the network by (reduced) bandwidth. If such a metric existed, devices attached to the network could also try to negotiate and wait for using IPv4, when the price / penality for IPv4 is low (this might be very suitable for mail exchangers for instance). Proposal 2: High speed NAT64 with P4 Currently there are two main open source NAT64 solution available: tayga[0] and jool[1]. The former is a single threaded, cpu bound user space solution, the latter a custom Linux kernel module. I would like to challenge this status quo and develop a P4 based solution supporting all features of jool/tayga and comparing the performance and adaptivity of the solutions. [0] http://www.litech.org/tayga/ [1] https://www.jool.mx/en/index.html Proposal 3: Challenging the status quo with IPv10 The de facto standard in networking is to treat IPv4 and IPv6 as "impossible to combine". This proposal is to challenge this notion with three different methods: - Extensions to IPv4 to request remote IPv6 transport - Extensions to IPv6 to request remote IPv4 transport - Support in network equipment to handle the extensions As the IPv4 header does not allow embedding IPv6 addresses due to size limitations, embedding the destination address in a secondary header might be necessary (possibly encapsulated in UDP).