IETF Logo Mail Archive

RE: [SAFE] nat-control-stun-usage-04

"Dan Wing" <dwing@cisco.com> Thu, 11 October 2007 16:48 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 1Ig1Cu-0006G7-Ad; Thu, 11 Oct 2007 12:48:20 -0400
Received: from safe by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1Ig1Cs-0006C3-DK for safe-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 11 Oct 2007 12:48:18 -0400
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ig1Cs-0006B3-2e for safe@ietf.org; Thu, 11 Oct 2007 12:48:18 -0400
Received: from sj-iport-1-in.cisco.com ([171.71.176.70] helo=sj-iport-1.cisco.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ig1Cq-0002Q6-SR for safe@ietf.org; Thu, 11 Oct 2007 12:48:18 -0400
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.21,260,1188802800"; d="scan'208";a="22754715"
Received: from sj-dkim-2.cisco.com ([171.71.179.186]) by sj-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 11 Oct 2007 09:48:16 -0700
Received: from sj-core-2.cisco.com (sj-core-2.cisco.com [171.71.177.254]) by sj-dkim-2.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id l9BGmGuQ001262; Thu, 11 Oct 2007 09:48:16 -0700
Received: from dwingwxp01 ([10.32.240.195]) by sj-core-2.cisco.com (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id l9BGmFZp021397; Thu, 11 Oct 2007 16:48:15 GMT
From: Dan Wing <dwing@cisco.com>
To: 'Rémi Denis-Courmont' <remi.denis-courmont@nokia.com>, safe@ietf.org
References: <042001c80b74$509c46b0$c3f0200a@cisco.com> <200710111357.44688.remi.denis-courmont@nokia.com>
Subject: RE: [SAFE] nat-control-stun-usage-04
Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2007 09:48:15 -0700
Message-ID: <024a01c80c26$85317280$c3f0200a@cisco.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11
In-Reply-To: <200710111357.44688.remi.denis-courmont@nokia.com>
X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3138
Thread-Index: AcgL9YsutvTZGQ/6R66ac1MMABSL+QAMJq6Q
DKIM-Signature: v=0.5; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=954; t=1192121296; x=1192985296; c=relaxed/simple; s=sjdkim2002; 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]=20nat-control-stun-usage-04 |Sender:=20; bh=tZwA7fuq61RkRjXlURb7A3P0WSRixcksXha9zc0pUcQ=; b=gYhknN+1o+TMKweCODmEuf32D65gp8VcJKRnu/sC3chAEkaoPNMGxHoPQ9TBMw4ha/PLAZOt RX5uHOy/U1JGwm3ZTrWEa2Hz1q8XsqQhJTiSwDOFtN+8R+Qh4YXjggkf;
Authentication-Results: sj-dkim-2; header.From=dwing@cisco.com; dkim=pass (s ig from cisco.com/sjdkim2002 verified; );
X-Spam-Score: -4.0 (----)
X-Scan-Signature: ffa9dfbbe7cc58b3fa6b8ae3e57b0aa3
Cc:
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

> >    o  Introduction now concentrates on the primary purpose of STUN
> >       Control, namely reducing keepalive traffic for SIP-Outbound.
> 
> As far as I understand, STUN in general, and STUN in 
> particular, can be used for any UDP-based always-on protocol. 
> ESP-in-UDP, TEREDO, perhaps some long usages of RTP (such as 
> MIDI-over-RTP(?) or RTSP-based streaming), proprietary 
> UDP overlays (not giving any names)...

You're right.

I will expand the draft to describe how STUN Control could reduce
keepalive traffic for those protocols.

> And then, there is the relation to ICE in finding 
> "intermediary" NAT mappings 
> in nested NATs scenarios.
> 
> At the same time, I thought SIP Outbound was going to 
> recommend TCP, so that 
> it could end up being a less likely "customer" of STUN control??

Unfortunately, most SIP signaling remains UDP no matter the statements or
warnings in IETF specifications.

-d


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

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email