IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [MEXT] tsv-dir review of draft-ietf-mext-nemo-v4traversal-06.txt

Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net> Tue, 02 December 2008 19:51 UTC

Return-Path: <mext-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: monami6-archive@megatron.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-monami6-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D9F333A6B65; Tue, 2 Dec 2008 11:51:35 -0800 (PST)
X-Original-To: mext@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mext@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B69B63A6B65; Tue, 2 Dec 2008 11:51:34 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.518
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.518 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.081, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id SERcslQlQsqq; Tue, 2 Dec 2008 11:51:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtp.piuha.net (p130.piuha.net [IPv6:2001:14b8:400::130]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CEACD3A6B58; Tue, 2 Dec 2008 11:51:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtp.piuha.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B1C619870B; Tue, 2 Dec 2008 21:51:29 +0200 (EET)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (unknown [IPv6:2001:14b8:400::130]) by smtp.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id D13DB198639; Tue, 2 Dec 2008 21:51:28 +0200 (EET)
Message-ID: <493591AC.2030303@piuha.net>
Date: Tue, 02 Dec 2008 21:51:08 +0200
From: Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.18 (X11/20081125)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Colin Perkins <csp@csperkins.org>, Hesham Soliman <hesham@elevatemobile.com>
References: <FB1A81A1-8ADB-43DC-A820-9BDE8EE75919@csperkins.org>
In-Reply-To: <FB1A81A1-8ADB-43DC-A820-9BDE8EE75919@csperkins.org>
X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV using ClamSMTP
Cc: "mext@ietf.org" <mext@ietf.org>, ietf@ietf.org, TSV Dir <tsv-dir@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [MEXT] tsv-dir review of draft-ietf-mext-nemo-v4traversal-06.txt
X-BeenThere: mext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Mobile IPv6 EXTensions WG <mext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext>, <mailto:mext-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/pipermail/mext>
List-Post: <mailto:mext@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mext-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext>, <mailto:mext-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed"
Sender: mext-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: mext-bounces@ietf.org

Thanks for your review, Colin.

I agree that fixes or better explanations of the background should be 
given for the points that you raised. It seems that you and Hesham are 
making progress on what needs to be added to the document, great!

The only item that I too am somewhat worried about in your list is the 
address replacement by broken NATs and the tricks used to prevent that. 
I feel that the best way to deal with that is to document this as a 
potential problem -- the protocol already has tools to provide a far 
better obfuscation technique than XOR -- just turn on encryption if this 
turns out to be a problem and the device in question cannot be ripped 
out of the network. Do we have any information about how widespread such 
NATs might be? RFC 5389 just says "some NATs".

Jari

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

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email