Re: [P2PSIP] New draft: HIP BONE
Ali Fessi <ali.fessi@uni-tuebingen.de> Fri, 11 January 2008 15:53 UTC
Return-path: <p2psip-bounces@ietf.org>
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JDMCW-00058O-Mx; Fri, 11 Jan 2008 10:53:44 -0500
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JDMCV-00058J-Jl for p2psip@ietf.org; Fri, 11 Jan 2008 10:53:43 -0500
Received: from u-173-c156.cs.uni-tuebingen.de ([134.2.173.156] helo=smtp.cs.uni-tuebingen.de) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JDMCT-0007KJ-JZ for p2psip@ietf.org; Fri, 11 Jan 2008 10:53:43 -0500
Received: from u-172-c174.cs.uni-tuebingen.de ([134.2.172.174]) by smtp.cs.uni-tuebingen.de with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from <iinfe01@ri.uni-tuebingen.de>) id 1JDMC8-0004A4-1A; Fri, 11 Jan 2008 16:53:20 +0100
Message-ID: <478790EE.4050301@uni-tuebingen.de>
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2008 16:53:18 +0100
From: Ali Fessi <ali.fessi@uni-tuebingen.de>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Windows/20071031)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Pekka Nikander <pekka.nikander@nomadiclab.com>
Subject: Re: [P2PSIP] New draft: HIP BONE
References: <476BA8D9.4010203@ericsson.com> <20d2bdfb0712210823m2218c4a6mcace60af3d82db57@mail.gmail.com> <476E2B7C.9070601@ericsson.com> <20d2bdfb0801081416t41b9b84atb3a147659771036@mail.gmail.com> <77F357662F8BFA4CA7074B0410171B6D04049B22@XCH-NW-5V1.nw.nos.boeing.com> <086801c8530e$611d8030$6601a8c0@china.huawei.com> <4785566F.7000700@uni-tuebingen.de> <833EB4F9-41EE-41E5-A951-DE2AF0FE9FF8@nomadiclab.com>
In-Reply-To: <833EB4F9-41EE-41E5-A951-DE2AF0FE9FF8@nomadiclab.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: d0bdc596f8dd1c226c458f0b4df27a88
Cc: P2PSIP Mailing List <p2psip@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: p2psip@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Peer-to-Peer SIP working group discussion list <p2psip.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/p2psip>, <mailto:p2psip-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/p2psip>
List-Post: <mailto:p2psip@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:p2psip-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/p2psip>, <mailto:p2psip-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: p2psip-bounces@ietf.org
Hi Pekka, On 10 Jan 2008, at 13:45 Pekka Nikander wrote: > Hi Ali, > > On 10 Jan 2008, at 01:19, Ali Fessi wrote: > <snip> >> Simlarly, you can use the P2P protocol to resolve a HIP ORCHID to a >> Locator, and then when you get the Locator start the HIP handshake. >> >> And in fact, this is maybe something confusing in the HIP BONE draft >> [...] because HIP BONE says that a I1 message is transported >> hop-by-hop in the overlay. I would let the P2P protocol resolve the >> HIP Identifier to a Locator first, and then send the I1 message >> directly to the HIP Responder. > > That has been tried and there is even a prototype working on PlanetLab > using OpenDHT, but unfortunately there appears to be two problems. > First, OpenDHT latencies appear to be too long and unpredictable, > sometimes minutes and often exceeding 10 seconds. But that may be an > implementation problem that can be fixed. yes indeed, this is a OpenDHT specific problem. (we also had similar performance problems when experimenting with P2PSIP on OpenDHT) > The second, bigger problem is > that if both the initiator and the responder are behind NATs, the you > just cannot send the I1 message directly to the HIP responder. > > The latter is the reason why we chose to use a Berkeley i3 -like system > in both Hi3 and in HIP BONE, i.e., to forward HIP messages through the > overlay instead of using it in a typical DHT put/get manner. i3, Secure-i3 and Hi3 have however an assumption that does not hold here. The overlay consitutes of i3 servers which are considered to be trustworthy, have public addresses and can converge as rendez-vous points for "clients" behind NATs. This assumption does not hold for P2PSIP, since there is not such an overlay. So, when the I1 message is forwarded on the overlay, the NAT traversal problem needs to solved for each link on the path between the Initiator and the Responder. And this is not solved by HIP, unless you run HIP for each link on the overlay (including the HIP handshake and ICE for NAT traversal) which would be proably too much overhead. Moreover, the peer protocol needs to cope with NAT traversal for other type of messages for the overlay maintenance, e.g. joins and leaves, anyway. and again this is not solved by HIP, unless you do HIP hop-by-hop. My conslusions from these facts here (please feel free to heavily disagree and let me know if i am wrong) would be that: - *HIP actually does not solve the NAT traversal problem for P2PSIP*, as it has been assumed. - The peer protocol needs to cope with the NAT traversal by itself. Cheers, Ali > > --Pekka Nikander > -- Ali Fessi Computer Networks and Internet University of Tuebingen, Germany Phone: +49 7071 29-70576 / Fax: +49 7071 29-5220 EMail: ali.fessi@uni-tuebingen.de Web: http://net.informatik.uni-tuebingen.de/~fessi/ _______________________________________________ P2PSIP mailing list P2PSIP@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/p2psip
- [P2PSIP] New draft: HIP BONE Gonzalo Camarillo
- Re: [P2PSIP] New draft: HIP BONE Bruce Lowekamp
- Re: [P2PSIP] New draft: HIP BONE Salman Abdul Baset
- Re: [P2PSIP] New draft: HIP BONE Pekka Nikander
- Re: [P2PSIP] New draft: HIP BONE Pekka Nikander
- [P2PSIP] HIP-P2P-SIP message flow examples Henry Sinnreich
- Re: [P2PSIP] New draft: HIP BONE Gonzalo Camarillo
- Re: [P2PSIP] New draft: HIP BONE Gonzalo Camarillo
- RE: [P2PSIP] New draft: HIP BONE Henry Sinnreich
- Re: [P2PSIP] New draft: HIP BONE Gonzalo Camarillo
- Re: [P2PSIP] New draft: HIP BONE Ali Fessi
- Re: [P2PSIP] New draft: HIP BONE Gonzalo Camarillo
- [P2PSIP] Resolving SIP URIs with HIP Ali Fessi
- [P2PSIP] a modular approach for integrating HIP f… Ali Fessi
- RE: [P2PSIP] New draft: HIP BONE Henderson, Thomas R
- Re: [P2PSIP] New draft: HIP BONE Pekka Nikander
- RE: [P2PSIP] a modular approach for integrating H… Henderson, Thomas R
- RE: [P2PSIP] New draft: HIP BONE Henderson, Thomas R
- [P2PSIP] Re: a modular approach for integrating H… Gonzalo Camarillo
- Re: [P2PSIP] Re: a modular approach for integrati… Miika Komu
- Re: [P2PSIP] New draft: HIP BONE Bruce Lowekamp
- RE: [P2PSIP] New draft: HIP BONE Henderson, Thomas R
- Re: [P2PSIP] New draft: HIP BONE Bruce Lowekamp
- RE: [P2PSIP] New draft: HIP BONE Henry Sinnreich
- Re: [P2PSIP] New draft: HIP BONE Spencer Dawkins
- Re: [P2PSIP] New draft: HIP BONE Ali Fessi
- RE: [P2PSIP] New draft: HIP BONE Henderson, Thomas R
- Re: [P2PSIP] New draft: HIP BONE Pekka Nikander
- Re: [P2PSIP] New draft: HIP BONE Pekka Nikander
- Re: [P2PSIP] New draft: HIP BONE Pekka Nikander
- Re: [P2PSIP] New draft: HIP BONE Pekka Nikander
- Re: [P2PSIP] New draft: HIP BONE Bruce Lowekamp
- RE: [P2PSIP] New draft: HIP BONE Henderson, Thomas R
- Re: [P2PSIP] HIP: optional, mandatory? Henning Schulzrinne
- Re: [P2PSIP] New draft: HIP BONE Spencer Dawkins
- Re: [P2PSIP] New draft: HIP BONE Spencer Dawkins
- Re: [P2PSIP] New draft: HIP BONE Spencer Dawkins
- Re: [P2PSIP] HIP: optional, mandatory? Bruce Lowekamp
- Re: [P2PSIP] HIP: optional, mandatory? Henning Schulzrinne
- Re: [P2PSIP] HIP: optional, mandatory? Bruce Lowekamp
- Re: [P2PSIP] HIP: optional, mandatory? Cullen Jennings
- Re: [P2PSIP] HIP: optional, mandatory? Spencer Dawkins
- Re: [P2PSIP] HIP: optional, mandatory? Henning Schulzrinne
- Re: [P2PSIP] HIP: optional, mandatory? David Barrett
- Re: [P2PSIP] New draft: HIP BONE Pekka Nikander
- Re: [P2PSIP] New draft: HIP BONE Spencer Dawkins
- Re: [P2PSIP] HIP: optional, mandatory? David A. Bryan
- Re: [P2PSIP] HIP: optional, mandatory? Spencer Dawkins
- Re: [P2PSIP] HIP: optional, mandatory? David A. Bryan
- Re: [P2PSIP] HIP: optional, mandatory? David A. Bryan
- Re: [P2PSIP] New draft: HIP BONE Ali Fessi
- Re: [P2PSIP] HIP: optional, mandatory? Henning Schulzrinne
- Re: [P2PSIP] HIP: optional, mandatory? Cullen Jennings
- Re: [P2PSIP] HIP: optional, mandatory? David A. Bryan
- Re: [P2PSIP] HIP: optional, mandatory? Roy, Radhika R Dr CTR USA USAMC
- Re: [P2PSIP] New draft: HIP BONE Pekka Nikander
- Re: [P2PSIP] New draft: HIP BONE Pekka Nikander
- Re: [P2PSIP] New draft: HIP BONE Pekka Nikander
- RE: [P2PSIP] HIP: optional, mandatory? Henry Sinnreich
- Re: RE: [P2PSIP] HIP: optional, mandatory? Roy, Radhika R Dr CTR USA USAMC
- RE: RE: [P2PSIP] HIP: optional, mandatory? Henry Sinnreich
- Re: [P2PSIP] HIP: optional, mandatory? Gonzalo Camarillo
- RE: [P2PSIP] HIP: optional, mandatory? Henry Sinnreich
- Re: [P2PSIP] HIP: optional, mandatory? Roy, Radhika R Dr CTR USA USAMC
- RE: [P2PSIP] HIP: optional, mandatory? JiangXingFeng
- RE: [P2PSIP] HIP: optional, mandatory? Oredope, Adetola
- Re: [P2PSIP] HIP: optional, mandatory? David Barrett
- RE: [P2PSIP] HIP: optional, mandatory? Henry Sinnreich
- RE: [P2PSIP] HIP: optional, mandatory? marcin.matuszewski
- Re: [P2PSIP] HIP: optional, mandatory? Erkki Harjula
- Re: RE: [P2PSIP] HIP: optional, mandatory? Roy, Radhika R Dr CTR USA USAMC
- RE: [P2PSIP] HIP: optional, mandatory? Henry Sinnreich
- Re: [P2PSIP] HIP: optional, mandatory? Enrico Marocco
- RE: [P2PSIP] HIP: optional, mandatory? marcin.matuszewski
- RE: RE: [P2PSIP] HIP: optional, mandatory? marcin.matuszewski
- Re: [P2PSIP] HIP: optional, mandatory? Henning Schulzrinne
- Re: [P2PSIP] HIP: optional, mandatory? Enrico Marocco
- Re: RE: RE: [P2PSIP] HIP: optional, mandatory? Roy, Radhika R Dr CTR USA USAMC
- RE: [P2PSIP] HIP: optional, mandatory? marcin.matuszewski
- RE: [P2PSIP] HIP: optional, mandatory? Henry Sinnreich
- Re: [P2PSIP] HIP: optional, mandatory? Erkki Harjula
- RE: [P2PSIP] HIP: optional, mandatory? Henry Sinnreich
- RE: [P2PSIP] HIP: optional, mandatory? marcin.matuszewski
- RE: RE: RE: [P2PSIP] HIP: optional, mandatory? marcin.matuszewski
- RE: [P2PSIP] HIP: optional, mandatory? Roy, Radhika R Dr CTR USA USAMC