[113352] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Do we still need Gi Firewall for 3G/UMTS/HSPA network ?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Rubens Kuhl)
Fri Apr 10 00:21:29 2009
In-Reply-To: <084962C061414240A0CDB4BE328A9B2D119F91724A@GVW1100EXC.americas.hpqcorp.net>
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2009 01:19:05 -0300
From: Rubens Kuhl <rubensk@gmail.com>
To: "Lee, Steven (NSG Malaysia)" <kin-wei.lee@hp.com>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On shared media like radio access, every unwanted packet means less
performance you will get out of the network. This can be done by NAT,
stateful filtering with public IPs or stateless filtering with public
IPs; the advantage of doing NAT is making it easier for the end-point
software to know that (two ways: noticing your local IP address is
from RFC1918 space, or connecting to a server that tells your IP in
order to compare it to the local address).
As such, GPRS, EDGE, EVDO, HSPA, LTE and Mobile WiMAX services have
good reasons to use NAT, and most do.
Rubens
On Thu, Apr 9, 2009 at 12:48 PM, Lee, Steven (NSG Malaysia)
<kin-wei.lee@hp.com> wrote:
> Hi all, in most of the existing 2G/2.5G mobile PS-core (Packet Switch) ne=
tworks have Gi segment (interface between GGSN & IP Router/firewall). Due t=
o the IP address constraint, operator usually do NAT on the Gi firewall to =
NAT the private IP to public IP in the past. Looking at the traffic pattern=
and user access behaviour, does it make sense to have firewall between the=
GGSN & Public Internet if the public IP addresses are sufficient to cater =
for mobile subscribers? Especially with 3G/UMTS/HSPA or even LTE in the fut=
ure.
>
> Please share your thought and thanks in advance :)
>
> Regards,
> Steven Lee
>
