IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [EME] The virtual circuit trap mentioned in the EME charter - need for clarification

Joe Touch <touch@ISI.EDU> Tue, 14 November 2006 19:11 UTC

Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Gk3gj-0002fn-5i; Tue, 14 Nov 2006 14:11:17 -0500
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Gk3gi-0002fi-MG for eme@irtf.org; Tue, 14 Nov 2006 14:11:16 -0500
Received: from vapor.isi.edu ([128.9.64.64]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Gk3gh-0003Or-Bs for eme@irtf.org; Tue, 14 Nov 2006 14:11:16 -0500
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (60.sub-75-210-252.myvzw.com [75.210.252.60]) by vapor.isi.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id kAEJAbHG016285; Tue, 14 Nov 2006 11:10:40 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <455A14AA.6010007@isi.edu>
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2006 11:10:34 -0800
From: Joe Touch <touch@ISI.EDU>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.8 (Windows/20061025)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Rémi Després <remi.despres@rd-iptech.com>
Subject: Re: [EME] The virtual circuit trap mentioned in the EME charter - need for clarification
References: <E6F7A586E0A3F94D921755964F6BE00662575C@EXCHANGE2.cs.cornell.edu> <4559FC5C.1090803@rd-iptech.com>
In-Reply-To: <4559FC5C.1090803@rd-iptech.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 0.94.0.0
X-ISI-4-43-8-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-MailScanner-From: touch@isi.edu
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: a7d6aff76b15f3f56fcb94490e1052e4
Cc: eme@irtf.org
X-BeenThere: eme@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: end-middle-end research group <eme.irtf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/eme>, <mailto:eme-request@irtf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/eme>
List-Post: <mailto:eme@irtf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:eme-request@irtf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/eme>, <mailto:eme-request@irtf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0030398244=="
Errors-To: eme-bounces@irtf.org


Rémi Després wrote:
> 2. I am not aware, personally, of failures of classical NATs that cannot
> be recovered (I mean those NATs that all of us use extensively)..

When there are multiple NATs that could be used for egress or ingress.

An outgoing SYN establishes state at one NAT that is typically not
shared with the other NATs; if the routing changes behind the NAT to the
egress, or in front of the NAT on the return path, the connection
breaks. FWIW, that routing can change for many reasons, including
failure of a NAT box itself.

Whether that's recoverable depends on whether you're willing to
reestablish a connection as part of recovery.

Joe


_______________________________________________
EME mailing list
EME@irtf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/eme

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email