RE: RNET: Randon Network Endpoint Technology

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ietf-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:ietf-bounces@ietf.org] On 
> Behalf Of Chad Giffin
> Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2008 9:49 AM
> To: IETF
> Subject: RNET: Randon Network Endpoint Technology
> 
> 
> 
> Chad Christopher Giffin
> Suite 205
> 123 Mayfair Avenue
> Winnipeg, Manitoba
> Canada   R3L 0A1
> 
> Phone: 1  204  475-1210
> 
> June 18th, 1145h CDT
> 
> To all members of the IETF mailing list;
> 
>      I have posted a description, twice, of the RNET protocol 
> to this mailing list.  I have also provided some updates 
> concerning peer to peer connections between RNET Hosts.
> 
>      I have yet to receive /any/ response (other then an 
> email with an empty body) concerning by postings.

Here is a response, which appeared to have been CC'd to you:
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/current/msg51774.html

I agree with Eric; based on the description of RNET, it sounds much like STUN
combined with a rendezvous protocol (e.g., SIP).  RNET is also similar to
HIP's NAT traversal.

STUN is RFC3489 and draft-ietf-behave-rfc3489bis.  SIP is RFC3261.  The use of
STUN with SIP is best described in draft-ietf-sipping-nat-scenarios.  HIP's
NAT traversal is described in draft-ietf-hip-nat-traversal.  

Hope that helps,
-d

>      Please tell me what you, as members of this list, think 
> about RNET.
> 
>      Should it exist?
>      Who should be allowed to use it?
>      Should it exists and remain hidden?
>      Has anything been overlooked in it's design? 
>      How much more work is needed to make this a reality 
> (besides have the Vendors of routing equipment and software 
> incorporate this technology into their IP stacks?)
> 
>      I am a great many people support this technology and we 
> wish it to be a reality.
> 
>      Please provide some response.
>      It need not be too revealing.
>      At least show some support.
> 
>      So many of us would appreciate anonynimity on the 
> Internet to avoid being detected by those who should never 
> know of our identity and/or location.  As well, it will deter 
> quite effificiently crackers from attacking our systems.
> 
>      The end result would simply be that all serious 
> individual users (nodes) of the Internet would have anonymous 
> endpoints and the advertised endpoints would be what is 
> publically accessible.
> 
> 
> Yours Truly,
> 
> Chad Christopher Giffin
> a.k.a.  "typo"
> 
> _________________________________________________________________
> 
> _______________________________________________
> IETF mailing list
> IETF@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

_______________________________________________
IETF mailing list
IETF@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf