Well, if history is any guide, eventually people will in fact want to run this from someplace a little farther away, and then you're in big trouble. So, I think the advice remains the same. There is no drawback to having it over UDP to start with - it works when there are no NAT, and it can work when there are NAT. -Jonathan R. Joel M. Halpern wrote: > However, I would really like to reinforce the point from another note. > There are quite a few contexts where the ability to run a sensible > transport directly over IP is indeed very useful. For example, the > ForCES working group scope is limited (by chart) to the case where the > control element is near the forwarding element. I am not worried about > there being a NAT between those. So SCTP or DCCP over IP is very relevant. > > Yours, > Joel M. Halpern > > > Jonathan Rosenberg wrote: >> I wrote this because of a discussion that happened during behave at the >> last IETF meeting in Vancouver. There was a presentation in the behave >> working group on NAT ALG for SCTP - when run natively over IP - and I >> found the entire conversation surreal. The entire problem would have >> been moot if SCTP had been designed to run over UDP and not IP. >> >> So apparently its not obvious to everyone that you cannot design >> protocols natively ontop of IP. >> >> -Jonathan R. > _______________________________________________ > Ietf mailing list > Ietf@xxxxxxxx > http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf > -- Jonathan D. Rosenberg, Ph.D. 499 Thornall St. Cisco Fellow Edison, NJ 08837 Cisco, Voice Technology Group jdrosen@xxxxxxxxx http://www.jdrosen.net PHONE: (408) 902-3084 http://www.cisco.com _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf