IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Spud] PCP vs. SPUD

"Pal Martinsen (palmarti)" <palmarti@cisco.com> Wed, 25 March 2015 22:31 UTC

Return-Path: <palmarti@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: spud@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: spud@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9BA621A06E9 for <spud@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 25 Mar 2015 15:31:08 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.511
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.511 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id EkZlCgrcmI4G for <spud@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 25 Mar 2015 15:31:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from alln-iport-2.cisco.com (alln-iport-2.cisco.com [173.37.142.89]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2690E1A1A1D for <spud@ietf.org>; Wed, 25 Mar 2015 15:31:07 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1068; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1427322667; x=1428532267; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=fX1FqXsNFfku1wvjSSRFn6D8xWVfJMfQQ5346GeCOmE=; b=b2nPXbOY2J/4ARaizEbXXQWw+zSCZ2OHJnjH9m2I5yUYYIKB2BRXKoSd ri3GKBziw4UZ5C0IA4USqjDFD5501xFQU/TpcP/YDG04CzRU0exvzqx9g QTXNuwSQTQJLuLkLvgyIuyEob9tbj6E0qJiQ/S0O1VXPA6FTWGERS7q6P I=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0ATBQB/NhNV/5RdJa1cgwZSWgSDDsF6CoV1AhyBP0wBAQEBAQF9hBQBAQEDAQEBASAROgsFCwIBCBgCAiYCAgIfBgsVEAIEDgWIGwMJCA2vcpRQDYVFAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBEwSBIYoAgkeCLweCaC+BFgEEkFCIIoFNjgOGKSKDbm+BRH8BAQE
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.11,467,1422921600"; d="scan'208";a="135428740"
Received: from rcdn-core-12.cisco.com ([173.37.93.148]) by alln-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 25 Mar 2015 22:31:07 +0000
Received: from xhc-rcd-x04.cisco.com (xhc-rcd-x04.cisco.com [173.37.183.78]) by rcdn-core-12.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id t2PMV6N8007046 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Wed, 25 Mar 2015 22:31:06 GMT
Received: from xmb-rcd-x06.cisco.com ([169.254.6.40]) by xhc-rcd-x04.cisco.com ([173.37.183.78]) with mapi id 14.03.0195.001; Wed, 25 Mar 2015 17:31:06 -0500
From: "Pal Martinsen (palmarti)" <palmarti@cisco.com>
To: Aaron Falk <aaron.falk@gmail.com>
Thread-Topic: [Spud] PCP vs. SPUD
Thread-Index: AQHQZ0P9x7+U+KTJTk2JT2k0tuzn3J0uHAqA
Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2015 22:31:06 +0000
Message-ID: <2A7D5F44-133C-467E-A3FE-15556E8EC35D@cisco.com>
References: <CAD62q9XopDJ7PFA9Hz7R2nV6OcwhQA=T=oGwQAN2_0EFPZvwzg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAD62q9XopDJ7PFA9Hz7R2nV6OcwhQA=T=oGwQAN2_0EFPZvwzg@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.61.91.190]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <919766AE00C23A4597CE76348D56C053@emea.cisco.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spud/BXDIxiL2ClDs1LGwlPgUPrJffyM>
Cc: "spud@ietf.org" <spud@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Spud] PCP vs. SPUD
X-BeenThere: spud@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Session Protocol Underneath Datagrams <spud.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/spud>, <mailto:spud-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/spud/>
List-Post: <mailto:spud@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:spud-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spud>, <mailto:spud-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2015 22:31:08 -0000

> On 25 Mar 2015, at 16:38, Aaron Falk <aaron.falk@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> If we take SPUD's goals at their most minimal, as expressed by Ted, of enabling passage of encrypted traffic through middleboxes, can someone explain why PCP is not sufficient?  
> 
SPUD can easily replace STUN as the connectivity check protocol when doing ICE without adding more packets to the “transaction”. You would do the “pinhole” functionality and open up the tube(s) with one packet. 

With PCP , I think, you would first need to talk to the FW to open the pinhole, and then you can run ICE/STUN as normal.

.-.
Pål-Erik 



> --aaron
> _______________________________________________
> Spud mailing list
> Spud@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spud

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email