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

Pekka,

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.

-d

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Magnus Westerlund [mailto:magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com] 
> Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2007 6:34 AM
> To: safe@ietf.org
> Subject: [SAFE] FW: [OPS-AREA] FW: [tsv-area] BOF request 
> underconsideration: SAFE
> 
> Hi,
> 
> This was sent to the V6OPS list by Pekka Savola. I forward it to the
> SAFE list with his permission for commenting.
> 
> Magnus Westerlund
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Pekka Savola [mailto:pekkas@netcore.fi]
> Sent: Monday, October 08, 2007 7:07 PM
> To: Romascanu, Dan (Dan)
> Cc: ops-area@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [OPS-AREA] FW: [tsv-area] BOF request under 
> consideration:
> SAFE
> 
> On Mon, 8 Oct 2007, Romascanu, Dan (Dan) wrote:
> > ICE and its companion protocol STUN have been successfully 
> deployed on
> 
> > the Internet for NAT traversal.  ICE and STUN have several 
> > characteristics which contribute to their success:
> >
> >  1. incremental deployment.  ICE and STUN are functional without any
> >     modifications to existing NATs.
> >  2. nested NATs.  ICE and STUN work when there are multiple NATs
> >     between a host and the Internet.
> >  3. topology unaware.  ICE and STUN are not configured with
> >     information about NATs, firewalls, or their locations -- only
> >     with the IP address of a server on the Internet.
> >  4. simple security model.  If a host behind a NAT is 
> allowed to send
> >     a packet across the NAT, it is allowed to receive a response.
> >  5. works on routed networks, which allows operation in both
> >     enterprise networks and home networks.
> 
> Teredo also fulfills these characteristics (and has none of the
> drawbacks listed later).
> 
> I'm confident that the BOF proposers will be able to invent new
> drawbacks to exclude Teredo from consideration, though.
> 
> -- 
> Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves king, yet the
> Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
> Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> SAFE mailing list
> SAFE@ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/safe

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