Eddie,
I tried to create text on the topics you raised during WGLC.
Specifically, you introduced a 6-tuple, which actually I don't yet fully
understand: I see the need to handle cases where two clients are behind
a NAPT and appear to tunnel from the same "host" using different UDP
ports, resulting in them using the same DCCP 4-tuple, but I'm not sure
exactly what a DCCP-UDP server should do.
1) Does the text capture the problem?
2) Do you think this is the right method to handle this?
- my concern is whether this adds significant extra complexity to the
DCCP stack/module.
Gorry
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: New Version Notification for draft-ietf-dccp-udpencap-03
Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2010 05:03:31 -0800 (PST)
From: IETF I-D Submission Tool <idsubmission@xxxxxxxx>
To: gorry@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
CC: tphelan@xxxxxxxxxxxx
A new version of I-D, draft-ietf-dccp-udpencap-03.txt has been
successfully submitted by Gorry Fairhurst and posted to the IETF repository.
Filename: draft-ietf-dccp-udpencap
Revision: 03
Title: Datagram Congestion Control Protocol (DCCP) Encapsulation for
NAT Traversal (DCCP-UDP)
Creation_date: 2010-12-08
WG ID: dccp
Number_of_pages: 12
Abstract:
This document specifies an alternative encapsulation of the Datagram
Congestion Control Protocol (DCCP), referred to as DCCP-UDP. This
encapsulation allows DCCP to be carried through the current
generation of Network Address Translation (NAT) middleboxes without
modification of those middleboxes. This documents also updates the
SDP information for DCCP defined in RFC 5762.
The IETF Secretariat.
