Re: [BEHAVE] [v6ops] protocols without need for ALG ?
"Senthil Sivakumar (ssenthil)" <ssenthil@cisco.com> Fri, 31 July 2015 19:14 UTC
Return-Path: <ssenthil@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: behave@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: behave@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C407A1B2DFF; Fri, 31 Jul 2015 12:14:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.511
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.511 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8LUOyuwmTGZP; Fri, 31 Jul 2015 12:14:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com [173.37.86.77]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3AEC51B2D4F; Fri, 31 Jul 2015 12:14:06 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1978; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1438370046; x=1439579646; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=Y9jQyGRety5YOHAZnjdNbzagx/cAIvESdk/pNmMUl1k=; b=Shx1QZ31mLhUNUOsW6tCxMy7sgfQqcCbftx62YL6eH8DMtlp8Iw43fsZ +MGLttwUZ4Xy8+ebxSmJT8M9vRO7ZqkNfAquMesSbvOefMxWKqyBMaHyb KPCAH9jnvVO+wlAWPb9KwJVjUDcB2PR+kOHnJ2eHUQJ4IJTCkY51vRWYd Y=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0B9BQBEyLtV/4MNJK1bDoMMVGkGvjMKhS9KAoEyOxEBAQEBAQEBgQqEJAEBBAEBATc0CxACAQgYFgEHECcLJQIEAQ0FiC4Nx0YBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQETBItOhQcHEwGEGAWFZY8TAYoMgjyBR5QTg2Umgz8+b4EHBxcjgQQBAQE
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.15,586,1432598400"; d="scan'208";a="16722737"
Received: from alln-core-1.cisco.com ([173.36.13.131]) by rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com with ESMTP; 31 Jul 2015 19:14:04 +0000
Received: from xhc-aln-x15.cisco.com (xhc-aln-x15.cisco.com [173.36.12.89]) by alln-core-1.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id t6VJE0bZ010123 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Fri, 31 Jul 2015 19:14:00 GMT
Received: from xmb-rcd-x15.cisco.com ([169.254.5.77]) by xhc-aln-x15.cisco.com ([173.36.12.89]) with mapi id 14.03.0195.001; Fri, 31 Jul 2015 14:14:00 -0500
From: "Senthil Sivakumar (ssenthil)" <ssenthil@cisco.com>
To: Joe Touch <touch@isi.edu>, Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>, "Toerless Eckert (eckert)" <eckert@cisco.com>
Thread-Topic: [BEHAVE] [v6ops] protocols without need for ALG ?
Thread-Index: AQHQywp4WemgLTWIcUiyGhVGVVQ3qJ301TGAgAAEyQCAASrNgA==
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2015 19:13:59 +0000
Message-ID: <D1E140C2.14A721%ssenthil@cisco.com>
References: <20150730205806.GI1667@cisco.com> <33A0B18B-5C9D-4DC3-9E0B-736D7ECA404F@delong.com> <55BA960E.7010700@isi.edu>
In-Reply-To: <55BA960E.7010700@isi.edu>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.5.3.150624
x-originating-ip: [10.150.24.24]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <1CDC18AAA2B2AA4B8A046C6C838CE992@emea.cisco.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/behave/YwSaxSwF586kOQreTCS68CCU-zE>
Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org" <v6ops@ietf.org>, "behave@ietf.org" <behave@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [BEHAVE] [v6ops] protocols without need for ALG ?
X-BeenThere: behave@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: mailing list of BEHAVE IETF WG <behave.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/behave>, <mailto:behave-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/behave/>
List-Post: <mailto:behave@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:behave-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/behave>, <mailto:behave-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2015 19:14:07 -0000
On 7/30/15, 5:24 PM, "Behave on behalf of Joe Touch" <behave-bounces@ietf.org on behalf of touch@isi.edu> wrote: > > >On 7/30/2015 2:07 PM, Owen DeLong wrote: >> >>> On Jul 30, 2015, at 13:58 , Toerless Eckert <eckert@cisco.com> wrote: >>> >>> For autonomic networking (ANIMA WG), we are planning to rely only on >>>IPv6 for initial >>> autonomic connectivity, and the question of connecting this (at least >>>initially) >>> to IPv4 only NOC equipment came up. Alas, IPv6 support in transport >>>seems to be still >>> weak on a range of commonly used NOC tools. >>> >>> If i understand the NAT RFCs and behave output correctly, we primaerily >>> want ALGs to go the way of the dodo, > >NATs too, if we're taking requests... > >... >>> Wrt to what seems to be important between NOC and network devices: >>> >>> FTP - NOK (requires ALG) - IMHO not a problem >> >> FTP should be long deprecated for the most part anyway, however, PASV >> mode FTP (if you must use FTP) should be OK without need of an ALG. > >FTP has security problems but anonymous mode access to files is still >used. As noted, PASV avoids the need for ALG in-band address translation. > >All the listed protocols should be OK if the client is behind the NAT >(as noted) *or* if the NAT is configured to forward those services to a >particular private-side host. > >Other ALG protocols not on your list: > > web: > HTTP (mostly to hijack initial login screens, > somtimes to insert tracking or ads) > > teleconferencing/media: > Apple iChat > H.323 > MGCP (media gateway) > RTSP (realtime streaming) > SCCP (Cisco call signalling) > SIP > > remote functions: > RPC (Sun, Microsoft) > SQL > > tunneling: > PPTP Also, include LDAP, DNS and Netbios ALGs to the list. Senthil > >--- > >_______________________________________________ >Behave mailing list >Behave@ietf.org >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/behave
- Re: [BEHAVE] [v6ops] protocols without need for A… Owen DeLong
- Re: [BEHAVE] [v6ops] protocols without need for A… Joe Touch
- Re: [BEHAVE] [v6ops] protocols without need for A… Owen DeLong
- Re: [BEHAVE] [v6ops] protocols without need for A… Mikael Abrahamsson
- Re: [BEHAVE] [v6ops] protocols without need for A… Mikael Abrahamsson
- Re: [BEHAVE] [v6ops] protocols without need for A… Joe Touch
- Re: [BEHAVE] [v6ops] protocols without need for A… Ca By
- Re: [BEHAVE] [v6ops] protocols without need for A… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [BEHAVE] [v6ops] protocols without need for A… STARK, BARBARA H
- [BEHAVE] protocols without need for ALG ? Toerless Eckert
- Re: [BEHAVE] [v6ops] protocols without need for A… Toerless Eckert
- Re: [BEHAVE] [v6ops] protocols without need for A… Mark Smith
- Re: [BEHAVE] [v6ops] protocols without need for A… Toerless Eckert
- Re: [BEHAVE] [v6ops] protocols without need for A… Heatley, Nick
- Re: [BEHAVE] [v6ops] protocols without need for A… Heatley, Nick
- Re: [BEHAVE] [v6ops] protocols without need for A… 🔓Dan Wing
- Re: [BEHAVE] [v6ops] protocols without need for A… Senthil Sivakumar (ssenthil)
- Re: [BEHAVE] [v6ops] protocols without need for A… Tore Anderson
- Re: [BEHAVE] protocols without need for ALG ? Michael Richardson
- Re: [BEHAVE] [v6ops] protocols without need for A… Mark Smith
- Re: [BEHAVE] [v6ops] protocols without need for A… Joe Touch
- Re: [BEHAVE] [v6ops] protocols without need for A… Mark Smith
- Re: [BEHAVE] [v6ops] protocols without need for A… Toerless Eckert
- Re: [BEHAVE] [v6ops] protocols without need for A… Tore Anderson
- Re: [BEHAVE] [v6ops] protocols without need for A… Joe Touch
- Re: [BEHAVE] protocols without need for ALG ? ietfdbh
- Re: [BEHAVE] [v6ops] protocols without need for A… Mark Andrews
- Re: [BEHAVE] [v6ops] protocols without need for A… Joe Touch