Re: FW: New Version Notification for draft-phelan-dccp-natencap-03

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



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/
> 
> 



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Linux DCCP]     [IETF Annouce]     [Linux Networking]     [Git]     [Security]     [Linux Assembly]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [DDR & Rambus]

  Powered by Linux