IETF Logo Mail Archive

RE: [SAFE] Addressing nested NAT issues for STUN control

"Dan Wing" <dwing@cisco.com> Fri, 26 October 2007 17:11 UTC

Return-path: <safe-bounces@ietf.org>
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IlSiX-00020a-PM; Fri, 26 Oct 2007 13:11:29 -0400
Received: from safe by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IlSiV-0001xt-T4 for safe-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Fri, 26 Oct 2007 13:11:27 -0400
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IlSiV-0001xk-7x for safe@ietf.org; Fri, 26 Oct 2007 13:11:27 -0400
Received: from sj-iport-6.cisco.com ([171.71.176.117]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IlSiP-0004uu-0x for safe@ietf.org; Fri, 26 Oct 2007 13:11:27 -0400
Received: from sj-dkim-1.cisco.com ([171.71.179.21]) by sj-iport-6.cisco.com with ESMTP; 26 Oct 2007 10:11:15 -0700
Received: from sj-core-4.cisco.com (sj-core-4.cisco.com [171.68.223.138]) by sj-dkim-1.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id l9QHBFap027926; Fri, 26 Oct 2007 10:11:15 -0700
Received: from dwingwxp01 ([10.32.240.196]) by sj-core-4.cisco.com (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id l9QHBEPX003177; Fri, 26 Oct 2007 17:11:14 GMT
From: Dan Wing <dwing@cisco.com>
To: 'Magnus Westerlund' <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com>
References: <47209D16.7010902@ericsson.com><092101c81740$7125fd40$c4f0200a@cisco.com><47219865.9000103@ericsson.com> <135e01c817a5$b46093d0$c4f0200a@cisco.com>
Subject: RE: [SAFE] Addressing nested NAT issues for STUN control
Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2007 10:11:14 -0700
Message-ID: <164701c817f3$3772eeb0$c4f0200a@cisco.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3138
In-Reply-To: <135e01c817a5$b46093d0$c4f0200a@cisco.com>
Thread-Index: AcgXopTh+oAOjkUQTTWb3pWVMGBgjQAAlhxgABN9DKA=
DKIM-Signature: v=0.5; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=524; t=1193418675; x=1194282675; c=relaxed/simple; s=sjdkim1004; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=dwing@cisco.com; z=From:=20=22Dan=20Wing=22=20<dwing@cisco.com> |Subject:=20RE=3A=20[SAFE]=20Addressing=20nested=20NAT=20issues=20for=20S TUN=20control |Sender:=20; bh=FMwdInrVkX74a8Einpvo57IGL/YVelQEOEIbBhcpkTs=; b=QauaUtb92zQ9u6PL4gzMG6nlk7dXXhFYGa0jAOwMBn3x4KCqCghpzfNvrF1oExe04Rjg39oS ZdfAiTGsyVbwQipSmjZ8XRywiTjD2dOmLoxHAYaW7et6/1vruZ/5AmCBe3Adhir79HjTqJsbu6 vDFy7lLxtQ6hIroPJc2a+NS00=;
Authentication-Results: sj-dkim-1; header.From=dwing@cisco.com; dkim=pass (s ig from cisco.com/sjdkim1004 verified; );
X-Spam-Score: -4.0 (----)
X-Scan-Signature: 68c8cc8a64a9d0402e43b8eee9fc4199
Cc: safe@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: safe@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Self-Address Fixing Evolution <safe.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/safe>, <mailto:safe-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/safe>
List-Post: <mailto:safe@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:safe-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/safe>, <mailto:safe-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: safe-bounces@ietf.org

> > I thought the issue with my example is that when stun 
> > client tries to
> > send to 192.168.1.2/3478 it will only reach itself. Rather 
> > then being issues to send to the gateway address.

I looked at your original email in more detail, and now understand
the case you were depicting.  In that case, the STUN client will
know the next-closer NAT has a certain NAT-IDENTIFIER value, and it
knows it isn't itself listening on UDP/3478, so it knows that
NAT-IDENTIFIER value came from an upstream NAT.

-d


_______________________________________________
SAFE mailing list
SAFE@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/safe

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email