RE: NAT-Traversal
"Jayant Shukla" <jshukla@trlokom.com> Mon, 06 May 2002 15:47 UTC
Received: from lists.tislabs.com (portal.gw.tislabs.com [192.94.214.101]) by above.proper.com (8.11.6/8.11.3) with ESMTP id g46FlWL20152; Mon, 6 May 2002 08:47:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by lists.tislabs.com (8.9.1/8.9.1) id KAA05946 Mon, 6 May 2002 10:57:40 -0400 (EDT)
From: Jayant Shukla <jshukla@trlokom.com>
To: 'Lokesh' <lokeshnb@intotoinc.com>, ipsec@lists.tislabs.com
Subject: RE: NAT-Traversal
Date: Mon, 06 May 2002 08:06:37 -0700
Message-ID: <012a01c1f50f$9e9f7750$0100a8c0@trlhpc1>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2627
Importance: Normal
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.0.20020503105853.009f8b80@172.16.1.10>
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200
Sender: owner-ipsec@lists.tislabs.com
Precedence: bulk
> -----Original Message----- > From: owner-ipsec@lists.tislabs.com > [mailto:owner-ipsec@lists.tislabs.com] > On Behalf Of Lokesh > Hi all, > I think NAT - Traversal fails if user configures IKE with Main mode and > Authentication method as > Preshared keys. Yes it is a known problem with NAT-T and it cannot be fixed because the IP addresses are sent after the authentication is done. There is an issue with certificates as well because of the IKE packet fragmentation. My personal opinion is that the NAT-T solution should be abandoned as it is flawed. Over the last two years several problems have been pointed out and the NAT-T ID keeps changing. A short while ago it was heavily criticized (after it made it to last call) and has since been modified (again)! Even so, the latest draft has several problems. > How to proceed? We have a working and tested solution that overcomes the pre-shared key problem as well as the certificate problem. We are going to show our solution at N+I 2002, 7th -9th May. Nobody seems to notice, but NAT traversal can be achieved without modifying IKE and without tunneling IPsec data through the IKE port. Not relying on IKE for NAT Traversal makes it a much more general solution and can be used elsewhere as well. Plus, there are several other advantages like true end-to-end security and there is no need for nested tunnels. The same solution can be applied to IP and mobile IP networks. Try that with NAT-T! Regards, Jayant Booth # 7981, N+I Las Vegas 2002 www.trlokom.com
- NAT-Traversal Lokesh
- RE: NAT-Traversal Jayant Shukla
- Specification of tunnel/transport attribute in IK… Andrew Krywaniuk
- Re: Specification of tunnel/transport attribute i… Markku Savela
- RE: Specification of tunnel/transport attribute i… Andrew Krywaniuk
- Re: Specification of tunnel/transport attribute i… Markku Savela
- Re: Specification of tunnel/transport attribute i… Henry Spencer
- Re: Specification of tunnel/transport attribute i… Markku Savela
- Re: Specification of tunnel/transport attribute i… Prof. Ahmed Bin Abbas Ahmed Ali Adas
- Re: Specification of tunnel/transport attribute i… Henry Spencer
- Re: Specification of tunnel/transport attribute i… Henry Spencer
- Re: Specification of tunnel/transport attribute i… Markku Savela
- Re: Specification of tunnel/transport attribute i… Dan Harkins
- Re: Specification of tunnel/transport attribute i… Francis Dupont
- Re: Specification of tunnel/transport attribute i… Markku Savela
- Re: Specification of tunnel/transport attribute i… Markku Savela
- Re: Specification of tunnel/transport attribute i… Francis Dupont
- Re: Specification of tunnel/transport attribute i… Dan Harkins
- Re: Specification of tunnel/transport attribute i… Markku Savela
- Re: Specification of tunnel/transport attribute i… Dan Harkins
- Re: Specification of tunnel/transport attribute i… Markku Savela
- Re: Specification of tunnel/transport attribute i… Dan Harkins
- Re: Specification of tunnel/transport attribute i… Markku Savela
- Re: Specification of tunnel/transport attribute i… Paul Hoffman / VPNC
- Re: Specification of tunnel/transport attribute i… Markku Savela
- Re: Specification of tunnel/transport attribute i… Jan Vilhuber
- Re: Specification of tunnel/transport attribute i… Marc Solsona
- Re: Specification of tunnel/transport attribute i… Markku Savela
- Re: Specification of tunnel/transport attribute i… Jan Vilhuber
- remove jrodriguez@intellinet-tech.com Jeremy Rodriguez
- Re: Specification of tunnel/transport attribute i… Markku Savela
- Re: Specification of tunnel/transport attribute i… Charlie_Kaufman
- RE: Specification of tunnel/transport attribute i… Andrew Krywaniuk
- RE: Specification of tunnel/transport attribute i… Michael Thomas
- Re: Specification of tunnel/transport attribute i… Stephen Kent