IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [SAFE] FW: [OPS-AREA] FW: [tsv-area] BOF request underconsideration: SAFE

Rémi Denis-Courmont <remi.denis-courmont@nokia.com> Fri, 12 October 2007 08:59 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 1IgGN5-0008Go-GX; Fri, 12 Oct 2007 04:59:51 -0400
Received: from safe by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IgGN5-0008E1-5T for safe-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Fri, 12 Oct 2007 04:59:51 -0400
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IgGN0-00088E-33 for safe@ietf.org; Fri, 12 Oct 2007 04:59:46 -0400
Received: from smtp.nokia.com ([131.228.20.171] helo=mgw-ext12.nokia.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IgGMt-0002ud-MM for safe@ietf.org; Fri, 12 Oct 2007 04:59:46 -0400
Received: from esebh106.NOE.Nokia.com (esebh106.ntc.nokia.com [172.21.138.213]) by mgw-ext12.nokia.com (Switch-3.2.5/Switch-3.2.5) with ESMTP id l9C8x6i4015014 for <safe@ietf.org>; Fri, 12 Oct 2007 11:59:32 +0300
Received: from esebh104.NOE.Nokia.com ([172.21.143.34]) by esebh106.NOE.Nokia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Fri, 12 Oct 2007 11:59:10 +0300
Received: from esebh101.NOE.Nokia.com ([172.21.138.177]) by esebh104.NOE.Nokia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Fri, 12 Oct 2007 11:59:10 +0300
Received: from esdhcp04194.research.nokia.com ([172.21.41.94]) by esebh101.NOE.Nokia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Fri, 12 Oct 2007 11:59:09 +0300
From: Rémi Denis-Courmont <remi.denis-courmont@nokia.com>
Organization: Nokia TP-SP-SWD
To: safe@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [SAFE] FW: [OPS-AREA] FW: [tsv-area] BOF request underconsideration: SAFE
Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2007 11:59:41 +0300
User-Agent: KMail/1.9.6 (enterprise 0.20070907.709405)
References: <470E262B.1080505@ericsson.com> <024901c80c26$16fd9ff0$c3f0200a@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <024901c80c26$16fd9ff0$c3f0200a@cisco.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200710121159.41676.remi.denis-courmont@nokia.com>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 12 Oct 2007 08:59:09.0998 (UTC) FILETIME=[271AF4E0:01C80CAE]
X-Nokia-AV: Clean
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 7655788c23eb79e336f5f8ba8bce7906
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

Le Thursday 11 October 2007 19:45:10 ext Dan Wing, vous avez écrit :
> The SAFE BoF isn't about comparing Teredo to STUN/ICE.
>
> Rather, it is about querying and controlling binding lifetimes of
> NATs in order to reduce the frequency of keepalive messages across
> those NATs.  This would benefit any UDP-based protocol that
> traverses NATs and, today, needs to send keepalives every 20-30
> seconds; such a protocol could reduce its keepalive traffic
> substantially.  Teredo and IPsec-over-UDP would benefit from
> such a reduction in keepalive traffic.

The Outside-In method would work, though the client would run a Teredo 
qualification procedure rather than a STUN Binding transaction with its 
server. When concluded, the the client can send a STUN Binding Request to its 
NAT.

The tagging approach fails terribly since Teredo qualification packet format 
is incompatible with STUN.

-- 
Rémi Denis-Courmont


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

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email