Re: [bfcpbis] [hackathon] IPv6 Transition and NAT traversal network setup

"Charles Eckel (eckelcu)" <> Wed, 19 October 2016 15:24 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8F0D12966F; Wed, 19 Oct 2016 08:24:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.951
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.951 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.431, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6AiA9c8w7co7; Wed, 19 Oct 2016 08:24:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0DC9D1299C8; Wed, 19 Oct 2016 08:24:58 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple;;; l=9154; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1476890698; x=1478100298; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:mime-version; bh=EOf7R3ccITiR985IhBAri3fDGBlkBsbFnrF0nMBKegE=; b=OyA+Y8N3d4Dg+EJgKAxJNNZA5vqkNkfztqPdw4JylFmIs2WHVZijmRbV 77iRhBJDeSWgkqeVW2iIyt7gAJVEUEnedV2mUJhH7YcWVw0a7I+YPEIAZ 25zy8burbsvMSPhP3SoNFETyV/l2Wa8EbWrd/0iBzaHSCFOzZPMdxFtcj M=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0DjAQDmjwdY/5RdJa1cDgwBAQEBAgEBA?= =?us-ascii?q?QEIAQEBAYMINgEBAQEBHVd9B40tpiGFFYIIhiECGoFePxQBAgEBAQEBAQFiKIR?= =?us-ascii?q?jAQEEI1YQAgEIDjEDAgICMBQRAgQBDQWIUrZ0jQgBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBA?= =?us-ascii?q?QEBAQEciDoIglCEGREBgyAsgi8FjkWLSAGJLoZbT48qkH0BHjYdOIQ5O3KGHYE?= =?us-ascii?q?ggQABAQE?=
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.31,514,1473120000"; d="scan'208,217";a="159697908"
Received: from ([]) by with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 19 Oct 2016 15:24:54 +0000
Received: from ( []) by (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u9JFOsT1003110 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Wed, 19 Oct 2016 15:24:54 GMT
Received: from ( by ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1210.3; Wed, 19 Oct 2016 10:24:53 -0500
Received: from ([]) by ([]) with mapi id 15.00.1210.000; Wed, 19 Oct 2016 10:24:53 -0500
From: "Charles Eckel (eckelcu)" <>
To: James Swan <>, "" <>
Thread-Topic: [hackathon] IPv6 Transition and NAT traversal network setup
Thread-Index: AQHSI9QnsZKJF5Lvj0Ow+NQhW1UK86Cv0LAA
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2016 15:24:53 +0000
Message-ID: <>
References: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/f.1b.0.161010
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_54AF05DE827C47768F587A4D6FC21BBAciscocom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <>
Cc: "" <>, "" <>
Subject: Re: [bfcpbis] [hackathon] IPv6 Transition and NAT traversal network setup
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: BFCPBIS working group discussion list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2016 15:25:00 -0000

Hi James,

Thanks for your email and sorry for the delay in responding. I had an issue with filters on my email client that I realized and fixed only today. I think this setup would be extremely valuable at the hackathon, especially in light of all the recent discussions and findings with ICE recently in the mmusic and bfcpbis lists (both cc’d). Of course, the setup is useful only if others come to use it, so hopefully others can forward to interested parties and chime in stating their interest in participating.


On 10/11/16, 8:27 AM, "hackathon on behalf of James Swan" <<> on behalf of<>> wrote:


My name is James Swan and work at the University of New Hampshire InterOperability Laboratory (UNH-IOL).  At the SIPit 32 event recently held at our facility we utilized a number of different networks in order to test SIP implementations ability to use STUN/TURN/ICE in order to make connections in various tuff network scenarios.  Some examples are an IPv6 only network, NAT'd networks in the same address range, multilayered NATs, and what we called an 'evil' hotel network that only allows DNS and TCP ports 80 and 443 (as many security constrained networks provide).  There was some discussion at SIPit on this being useful during the IETF hackathon to provide additional tools for testing implementations of other protocols that may be deployed in these various scenarios.  Would this type of setup be of interest to the IETF for the hackathon or other events held during the week?

Best Regards,