[Hipsec] Relaying to non-hip aware servers

Robert Moskowitz <rgm@htt-consult.com> Tue, 27 September 2016 13:48 UTC

Return-Path: <rgm@htt-consult.com>
X-Original-To: hipsec@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: hipsec@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4446412B1B8 for <hipsec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 27 Sep 2016 06:48:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.517
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.517 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-2.316, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1aCIOxI9WODs for <hipsec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 27 Sep 2016 06:48:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from z9m9z.htt-consult.com (z9m9z.htt-consult.com []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E104112B1BA for <hipsec@ietf.org>; Tue, 27 Sep 2016 06:48:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by z9m9z.htt-consult.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E1D0621C5 for <hipsec@ietf.org>; Tue, 27 Sep 2016 09:48:21 -0400 (EDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at htt-consult.com
Received: from z9m9z.htt-consult.com ([]) by localhost (z9m9z.htt-consult.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id htiyugEsPEMy for <hipsec@ietf.org>; Tue, 27 Sep 2016 09:46:48 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from lx120e.htt-consult.com (unknown []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by z9m9z.htt-consult.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4A8066212C for <hipsec@ietf.org>; Tue, 27 Sep 2016 09:46:48 -0400 (EDT)
To: hipsec@ietf.org
From: Robert Moskowitz <rgm@htt-consult.com>
Message-ID: <a1c2517a-1e06-7ae9-284d-79a172d8a3c5@htt-consult.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2016 09:46:41 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/hipsec/Y8_h5iK40x01Jyeq73PuQNieEbU>
Subject: [Hipsec] Relaying to non-hip aware servers
X-BeenThere: hipsec@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: "This is the official IETF Mailing List for the HIP Working Group." <hipsec.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/hipsec>, <mailto:hipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/hipsec/>
List-Post: <mailto:hipsec@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:hipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hipsec>, <mailto:hipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2016 13:48:26 -0000

Where did we describe connections from a mobile hip-aware host to a 
legacy non-HIP 'stable' server.

I thought it was HIPBONE (as it is not what HIP nat traversal is about), 
but I am not seeing this function there.

Basically, the Mobile host has its HIP SA with a relay that decapsulates 
the ESP traffic onto legacy Internet.

This can cause some nasty routing scenarios unless the HIP host can 
treat a group of relays as multihome interfaces or the like and use the 
best relay for any connection.  Which would drive TCP/UDP crazy though?

I recall through the window, darkly, that we had these discussions. But 
my search foo is weak and I am not finding them.