RE: [BEHAVE] Re: removing application milestone

Dan Wing wrote:
> 
> At the BEHAVE meeting in Prague there was strong consensus to remove 
> the milestone: "Submit informational that discusses current NAT 
> traversal techniques used by applications" from our charter, and to
not 
> adopt draft-ford-behave-app to meet that milestone.

I must strongly disagree with this proposal for several reasons, besides
the fact that majority consensus in a meeting has nothing to do with
getting it right.

The I-D
ftp://ftp.rfc-editor.org/in-notes/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-behave-p2p-
state-03.txt has the outstanding value compared to most other proposals,
such as the over abundant literature for ICE:

* A study based on real networks and the Internet,
* The authors have created a tool for testing NAT traversal,
* Many contributors have used the tool and reported results,
* The results are published, see
http://pdos.csail.mit.edu/papers/p2pnat.pdf 

This outstanding work is not only a model for the BEHAVE WG but also for
most other IETF WGs, where concept I-D predominate unfortunately over
proposals backed up by published research, running code and published
performance.

Given that ICE has now gained the status of a creed and maybe I have
missed it: Are there any published results on the effectiveness of ICE,
such as % of success in various NAT scenarios and call setup delay when
used with SIP?
I have seen one private report and it does not look that great.

At any rate, <draft-ietf-behave-p2p-state-03.txt> must be the top BEHAVE
WG item. Continuing this work should include identifying and measuring
NAT types used by ISPs and also the multi-homed ISP network scenario.
Updated test results such as in
http://pdos.csail.mit.edu/papers/p2pnat.pdf would also be welcome.

Thanks, Henry

_______________________________________________
Behave mailing list
Behave@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/behave