Subject: RE: [Mobike] issue 3 - nats

From: <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 16 May 2005 13:29:57 +0300

I agree with your proposals. As some people have expressed 
that they have no interest in NAT-T, I think it's important 
to also have (k): if you implement NAT-T, MOBIKE works with 
that, but implementing MOBIKE does not force you to do NAT-T
if you don't want.

Best regards,
Pasi

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jari Arkko
> Sent: Friday, May 13, 2005 1:05 PM
> To: MOBIKE Mailing List
> Subject: [Mobike] issue 3 - nats
>
<snip>
>
> Here are also some tentative answers to the questions:
> 
>   (a) Can we move behind a NAT?
>         [Yes. But requires NAT-D payloads in the address change
>         message, as discussed under issue 11.]
>   (b) Can we move out from a NAT?
>         [Yes. Does not require much. But see item h.]
>   (c) To which extent do we support the case that
>         party outside the NAT moves?
>         [No. This one is really hard. We will make our life much
>         simpler by saying no here. Outsider may not be able to
>         initiate anything inside. The only exception is covered under
>         item f.]
>   (d) If we are behind a NAT, can peer have multiple
>         addresses?
>         [Yes. Contrary to mobility, multihoming is possible
>         quite easily. Detailed protocol design has some further
>         details that need to be developed later, e.g., is there
>         a need to do keepalives on all address pairs? Tentatively,
>         the answer to that is no.]
>   (e) If we are behind a NAT on one interface, can   
>        another interface work without NAT/NAT-T?
>        [Yes.]
>   (f) Can the responder be behind a NAT?           
>        [Yes, but in a very limited scenario, when the NAT is
>        a static NAT and not a NAPT.]
>   (g) Do we need NAT prevention?
>         [Yes.]
>   (h) Do we want to disable UDP encapsulation when moving outside
>         from behind a NAT?
>         [Yes.]
>   (i) Send keepalives on current or on all paths?
>        [To be decided later.]
>   (j) How do we detect NATs?
>       [Using NAT-T functionality.]
>   (k) Is NAT-T support still optional within MOBIKE?
>        [Yes. You should be able to use MOBIKE in plain v6 
>        environments, for instance.]
> 
> --Jari
_______________________________________________
Mobike mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.machshav.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mobike