[OpenAFS] Re: 1.6 clients: rx version pings

Dale Pontius pontius@btv.ibm.com
Mon, 05 Dec 2011 15:19:24 -0500

On 12/05/2011 08:59 AM, Gary Buhrmaster wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 02:58, Harald Barth<haba@kth.se>  wrote:
> ...
>> IMHO it should be disabled completely if there are no RFC1918
>> interfaces on the client and enabled if there are such interfaces.
>> A command line flag to override in either direction would help
>> as well (for debugging, testing and strange deployments).
> No RFC1918 addresses does not mean no NAT
> (for a lot of bad reasons, some providers used
For that matter, using an RFC1918 address doesn't have to mean NAT, 
either, at least not as far as AFS is concerned.  When I'm working from 
home, my LAN uses a proper RFC1918 address, and of course goes through 
NAT at my border router prior to going into the cable modem.  But as far 
as my AFS packets are concerned, they go right into the VPN tunnel and 
see no NAT.  As far as they're concerned, I'm connected to my employer's 
network with a somewhat obnoxious ping time.

I wasn't aware of this rx ping load issue until seeing this thread.  In 
a worldwide enterprise AFS situation, with hundreds (thousands?) of 
servers, this isn't good.

Dale Pontius

Dale Pontius
Senior Engineer
IBM Corporation
Phone: (802) 769-6850
Tie-Line: 446-6850
email: pontius@us.ibm.com

This e-mail and its attachments, if any, may contain confidential and privileged material for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, use, distribution or disclosure by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient (or authorized to receive for the recipient), please contact the sender by reply e-mail and delete all copies of this message from your system without copying it and notify sender of the misdirection by reply e-mail.