Hi All, Aren't the default NAT timeouts for UDP and TCP different -- UDP has to be short because there's no other way to tell that a connection is no longer needed -- TCP can be longer because what the timeout is doing is just cleaning up broken connections. At any rate, DCCP would be more like TCP in this regard than UDP, I'd expect. Tom P. -----Original Message----- From: Ian McDonald [mailto:ian.mcdonald@xxxxxxxxxxx] Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2007 5:06 AM To: Lars Eggert Cc: ext Colin Perkins; Phelan, Tom; DCCP mailing list; Jonathan Rosenberg Subject: Re: WG Last Call for RTP over DCCP draft On 5/16/07, Lars Eggert <lars.eggert@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Following up on this, since no NAT that I know of currently > translates DCCP, IMO there isn't a need to be as super-conservative > with the timeout as ICE needs to be for UDP. Something longer is > probably fine. > > Lars > Linux has translated DCCP for NAT for quite a few releases now. Don't know what the timeout is though. It is treated basically the same as TCP and UDP. Ian -- Web: http://wand.net.nz/~iam4/ Blog: http://iansblog.jandi.co.nz WAND Network Research Group
