ietf-nat64 and 5GHz not-spots

[c@…]

A message for the NOC team,

*Please note this is not a rant or a 'trouble ticket', just observations I
hope would be useful*

After the discussion today at v6ops I gently encouraged some of my friends
here to migrate over from 'legacy' to nat64. They then did start to
experience issues.

In my data sample (of 2) i noted in both cases this had nothing to do with
v4 vs. v6 but more to do with the channel negotiation and 5GHz capabilities
of the devices in question.
a quick (rough) survey shows there are various locations in the building
where 5GHz is virtually non existent, with sufficient enough loss to
encounter packet loss.

As such I would state that any assertion that ~300 users on legacy or
2.4-only were having nat64 issues is based on a false premise as there are
likely more than one reason users would coalesce here.

Might I suggest that future meetings also have a dual frequency nat64, or
indeed a 2.4 only nat64 so that you can separate assumptions made around
channel availability and IP scheme.

Thank you for your efforts, an exclusive nat64 user since ietf89.

CraigT

[jim@…]

Craig,

Thanks for the feedback, and the attempt to have people give NAT64 a try. You're right that out 5ghz setup is a bit congested right now. We're currently using just the UNI-I bands, but had been avoiding UNI-II and III for DFS and other issues. After clarifying some details on the UNI-III bands, we'll be adding those to the mix, which should reduce some congestion.

That said, adding 2.4Ghz to a high density network rarely improves overall quality, but I'll discuss with my wireless folks and review our current position there. Perhaps adding 2.4Ghz will be possible.

Again, thank for your help!

• Jim

[Rick Alfvin]

Milestone renamed