Re: [Hipsec] Teredo compatibility

[Gonzalo Camarillo <[e-mail]>]

Hi,

trying to predict the outcome of the probes was mainstream thinking a 
few years ago. ICE was developed when it was pretty clear that 
prediction just did not work...

In any case, the idea in the HIP WG is to specify how to use NAT 
traversal mechanisms in HIP. If somebody wants to optimize ICE, MMUSIC 
(or maybe BEHAVE) would probably be the place to do it.

Cheers,

Gonzalo

Miika Komu wrote:
> Gonzalo Camarillo wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> running ICE over Teredo works but is potentially a big overkill due to 
> redundant functionality. Some of the results can be predicted as 
> depicted below (and even incorporated in the ICE module if needed).
> 
>> Hi,
>>
>> as Andrew indicates, the whole point of ICE is that it sends probes to 
>> see what works and what does not. We should not go off and specify stuff 
>> that will be discovered anyway at run time.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Gonzalo
>>
>> Andrew McGregor wrote:
>>> Ok, but in any case, candidate address probing deals with those issues.
>>>
>>> Andrew
>>>
>>> On 12/12/2009, at 1:02 AM, Miika Komu wrote:
>>>
>>>> Andrew McGregor wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> it should be short section then, right?)
>>>>
>>>> I basically agree with you. Based on our experimentation, it works 
>>>> but there are some caveats regarding to pairing of addressing. So, 
>>>> sending of packets from src->dst:
>>>>
>>>> Teredo->Teredo: works
>>>> Teredo->IPv6: does not work without a (commercial) relay service
>>>> IPv6->Teredo: works
>>>> IPv6->IPv6: (works :)
>>>>
>>>> Samu, please comment if I got the two middle ones in wrong order.
>>>>
>>>> Also, at least the miredo implementation on linux is good, but not 
>>>> perfect. Some performance-related issues and sometimes HIP packets 
>>>> just don't go through (usually restarting of miredo works).
>>>>
>>>>> Why?  It just works, if Teredo is available it's just another IPv6 
>>>>> address.
>>>>> Andrew
>>>>> On 12/12/2009, at 12:49 AM, Miika Komu wrote:
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> we've done some concrete work on NAT traversal with ICE, but what 
>>>>>> about Teredo? I think RFC5201 and RFC5206 should have some 
>>>>>> statements about Teredo-based addresses?
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Hipsec mailing list
>>>>>> [e-mail]
>>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hipsec
>>>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Hipsec mailing list
>>> [e-mail]
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hipsec
>>>
>