Subject: (NAT) Questions on RSIP

From: "Iyer, Prakash" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 19 Aug 1999 17:56:17 -0700

I had some questions on the RSIP drafts:

- The framework draft mentions a variety of transports for RSIP parameter
negotiation (e.g. COPS,
DIAMETER etc.). Is there a mechanism for a client and an RSIP server to
agree on a transport. How
is interoperability addressed? Are there implementations out there based on
one or more of these
transports?

- The framework draft also lists a variety of tunnel types (IP-IP, GRE
etc.). Again, is there some consensus
among implementors preferred modes.

- Are there proposed mechanisms to authenticate RSIP clients and servers.
For e.g. will IPSEC be a
good choice.

Prakash Iyer
Intel Corp.; Intel Architecture Labs
[email-masked]
Ph: 503-264-1815  Fx: 503-264-3483

-
To unsubscribe, email [email-masked]' with
'unsubscribe nat' in the body of the message.

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 13:25:37 -0500

As of the last IETF, the consensus was to use a port number for now until
the transport issue is resolved.  FYI, I'm using port 4455 in my implementation.

IPIP is the prefered mode and is mandatory to implement.   The rest are
optional, and can be negotiated.

IPSEC may be a good choice in some scenarios but not in others.  RSIP
has a lot of appeal to the thin client people, who don't have the room for a
full-blown IPSEC client on their boxes.  We're tackling the autentication
issue with a SOCKS-like mechanism.

All of these questions will be addressed in the next rev of the RSIP drafts.

Thanks,
Mike

"Iyer, Prakash" <[email-masked]> on 08/19/99 07:56:17 PM

Please respond to "Iyer, Prakash" <[email-masked]>

Sent by:  "Iyer, Prakash" <[email-masked]>

To:   "'nat @livingston.com'" <[email-masked]>
cc:    (Mike Borella/MW/US/3Com)
Subject:  (NAT) Questions on RSIP

Prakash Iyer

-

-