IETF Logo Mail Archive

[dispatch] Migrating SIP to IPv6 Media Without Connectivity Checks

"Dan Wing" <dwing@cisco.com> Fri, 27 August 2010 21:09 UTC

Return-Path: <dwing@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: dispatch@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dispatch@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED77B3A68DA for <dispatch@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 27 Aug 2010 14:09:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -110.627
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-110.627 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.028, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id gUGtw8TcsWbJ for <dispatch@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 27 Aug 2010 14:09:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sj-iport-5.cisco.com (sj-iport-5.cisco.com [171.68.10.87]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C16053A67B5 for <dispatch@ietf.org>; Fri, 27 Aug 2010 14:09:19 -0700 (PDT)
Authentication-Results: sj-iport-5.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.56,280,1280707200"; d="scan'208";a="246473653"
Received: from sj-core-3.cisco.com ([171.68.223.137]) by sj-iport-5.cisco.com with ESMTP; 27 Aug 2010 21:09:51 +0000
Received: from dwingWS ([10.21.78.156]) by sj-core-3.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o7RL9pUq004116; Fri, 27 Aug 2010 21:09:51 GMT
From: Dan Wing <dwing@cisco.com>
To: 'DISPATCH list' <dispatch@ietf.org>
Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2010 14:09:51 -0700
Message-ID: <06b201cb462c$30ade840$9209b8c0$@com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0
Thread-Index: ActGLDB6zGp/AdvKRF6bxyeAj4GNPA==
Content-Language: en-us
Cc: 'Andrew Yourtchenko' <ayourtch@cisco.com>
Subject: [dispatch] Migrating SIP to IPv6 Media Without Connectivity Checks
X-BeenThere: dispatch@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: DISPATCH Working Group Mail List <dispatch.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch>, <mailto:dispatch-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dispatch>
List-Post: <mailto:dispatch@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dispatch-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch>, <mailto:dispatch-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2010 21:09:29 -0000

At IETF78 we had a Bar BoF discussing why folks don't like ICE for doing
connectivity checks for dual-stack hosts.  The outcome of this Bar BoF was
an idea that Andrew and I wrote up,

Abstract:
   During the migration from IPv4 to IPv6, it is anticipated that an
   IPv6 path might be broken for a variety of reasons, causing endpoints
   to not receive RTP data.  Connectivity checks would detect and avoid
   the user noticing such a problem, but there is industry reluctance to
   implement connectivity checks.

   This document describes a mechanism allowing dual-stack SIP endpoints
   to attempt communications over IPv6 and fall back to IPv4 if the IPv6
   path is not working.  The mechanism does not require connectivity
   checks.

http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-wing-dispatch-v6-migration

I didn't know where to best send this (MMUSIC did ICE, BEHAVE did ICE's
connectivity checking protocols), so I'm trying DISPATCH because this is
mostly about how dual-stack SIP endpoints can avoid IPv6 network breakage.

Comments welcome.
-d

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email