Hi Colin, Well, I'm not sure, but that's why I said "probably neither of them showstoppers" :-). Let me think about it a bit... Tom P. > -----Original Message----- > From: Colin Perkins [mailto:csp@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] > Sent: Friday, November 20, 2009 2:58 PM > To: Phelan, Tom > Cc: DCCP working group > Subject: Re: FW: New Version Notification for draft-phelan-dccp- > natencap-03 > > Hi Tom, > > Both of those are features, rather than bugs though, right? > Colin > > > > On 20 Nov 2009, at 17:00, Phelan, Tom wrote: > > Hi Colin, > > > > I have two issues with this, probably neither of them showstoppers: > > > > 1) There's no way to support DCCP_NAT running on a non-standard port. > > > > 2) There's no way to say "Don't bother trying DCCP_RAW". > > > > Tom P. > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Colin Perkins [mailto:csp@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] > >> Sent: Friday, November 20, 2009 11:42 AM > >> To: Phelan, Tom > >> Cc: DCCP working group > >> Subject: Re: FW: New Version Notification for > > draft-phelan-dccp- > >> natencap-03 > >> > >> Tom, > >> > >> For the SDP, I think what's needed is a simple "a=dccp-in-udp" > >> attribute which is declarative, takes no parameters, and indicates > >> that the sender of the SDP supports the UDP encapsulation of DCCP. An > >> SDP offer using it would look something like: > >> > >> v=0 > >> o=alice 1129377363 1 IN IP4 192.0.2.47 > >> s=- > >> c=IN IP4 192.0.2.47 > >> t=0 0 > >> m=video 5004 DCCP/RTP/AVP 99 > >> a=rtcp-mux > >> a=rtpmap:99 h261/90000 > >> a=dccp-service-code:SC=x52545056 > >> a=dccp-in-udp > >> a=setup:passive > >> a=connection:new > >> > >> The idea is that the answering party will attempt to make a native > >> DCCP connection where possible, but will fall back to using UDP- > >> encapsulated DCCP if that doesn't work, or if it doesn't support > >> native DCCP (trying both in parallel is also possible, of course). > >> > >> This removes a lot of complexity from the SDP, and moves the test for > >> which transport actually works into the media path (where it has to > >> be, to work through middleboxes). > >> > >> Colin > >> > >> > >> > >> On 19 Nov 2009, at 12:47, Phelan, Tom wrote: > >>> Hi Colin, > >>> > >>> Thanks for the support and comments. I did apply for a UDP port a > >>> while ago, and was told I had to wait for it to be a WG draft. I'll > >>> reapply when/if this gets WG status. > >>> > >>> Can you give me more detail for what you'd like to see in the SDP? > >>> > >>> Tom P. > >>> > >>>> -----Original Message----- > >>>> From: Colin Perkins [mailto:csp@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] > >>>> Sent: Thursday, November 19, 2009 6:17 AM > >>>> To: Phelan, Tom > >>>> Cc: DCCP working group > >>>> Subject: Re: FW: New Version Notification for > >>> draft-phelan-dccp- > >>>> natencap-03 > >>>> > >>>> 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/ > >>>> > >>>> > >>> > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Colin Perkins > >> http://csperkins.org/ > >> > >> > > > > > > -- > Colin Perkins > http://csperkins.org/ > >
