Hi,
As I said in the meeting, we have an implementation of this (the basic
encapsulation, not the SDP signalling), and I support it's publication
as an experimental RFC. I have two suggestions for modifications,
though:
1) I'd recommend registering a UDP port for the DCCP-in-UDP
encapsulation service.
2) I suggest the SDP extension be changed to be a declarative "I
support DCCP-in-UDP NAT encapsulation" option, rather than listing
preferences or ports.
Both these are in the spirit of doing the simplest possible thing that
could work.
I'm happy to contribute text to the draft for these, if the group
accepts the idea.
Cheers,
Colin
On 18 Nov 2009, at 16:11, Phelan, Tom wrote:
Hi All,
I have submitted a new version of draft-phelan-dccp-natencap (-03) to
the I-D depository. This version just resurrects the draft after a
period of inactivity -- there are no technical changes.
Tom P.
-----Original Message-----
From: IETF I-D Submission Tool [mailto:idsubmission@xxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, November 18, 2009 11:09 AM
To: Phelan, Tom
Subject: New Version Notification for draft-phelan-dccp-natencap-03
A new version of I-D, draft-phelan-dccp-natencap-03.txt has been
successfuly submitted by Thomas Phelan and posted to the IETF
repository.
Filename: draft-phelan-dccp-natencap
Revision: 03
Title: Datagram Congestion Control Protocol (DCCP)
Encapsulation for NAT Traversal (DCCP-NAT)
Creation_date: 2009-11-18
WG ID: Independent Submission
Number_of_pages: 11
Abstract:
This document specifies an alternative encapsulation of the Datagram
Congestion Control Protocol (DCCP), referred to as DCCP-NAT. This
encapsulation will allow DCCP to be carried through the current
generation of Network Address Translation (NAT) middleboxes without
modification of those middleboxes.
The IETF Secretariat.
--
Colin Perkins
http://csperkins.org/
