Subject: [Hipsec] Teredo and HIP mobility/NAT

From: Robert Moskowitz <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 23 May 2014 07:54:46 -0400

I have thought a lot about this and generally it works out bad no matter 
how you slice it.  Well, if I was writing the network kernel, I would 
incorporate Teredo so that all interfaces presented an IPv6 address at 
all times and if it had a 'native' IPv6 would not use Teredo.  Basically 
tying Teredo right into the interface handling?

We have probably all thought long and hard about this.  Multiple 
interfaces, most of them mobile.  They are suppose to be changing their 
priority based on something or other (IEEE 802.21?)  IPv6 should be IPv6 
publicly routable.  But IPv4 will change from public, to good NAT, to 
bad NAT, and bounce around.  Because of this bad mix of reality we go to 
the lowest common denominator and do everything as if there is a bad NAT 
in the way.  We have no effective method of intelligently switching.

HIP everywhere does not fix bad NATs.

Networking reality basically xxxxx, well I do try and control my 
language in public.

---

From: Miika Komu <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 23 May 2014 15:56:16 +0300

Hi,

> Networking reality basically xxxxx, well I do try and control my

yes, draft-keranen-hip-native-nat-traversal-01 would allow HIP a better 
control of the NAT traversal.