Re: [Hipsec] HIP Native NAT Traversal

[Miika Komu <[e-mail]>]

On 04/09/2010 04:14 PM, Gonzalo Camarillo wrote:

Hi,

> Hi,
>
> in Anaheim, we decided to continue discussing on the list the following
> draft:
>
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-keranen-hip-native-nat-traversal/
>
> In particular, I would like to see discussions on the lessons learned
> from the STUN-based implementations and potential benefits of
> implementing STUN-like functionality in HIP.

from a protocol design perspective, demultiplexing of HIP, ESP and STUN 
packets is complicated. At implementation level, this introduced an 
additional requirement of packet capture using iptables. I believe this 
part would become cleaner design and implementation-wise by replacing 
STUN with HIP.

It actually took quite a lot effort to hook in a standalone ICE library 
to the base exchange code. I believe it would also further complicate 
the mobility code.

+1 for the new draft, I believe having a single control plane instead of 
two makes things simpler. I would suggest the new draft to replace the 
existing one for standards track.