Subject: Re: I-D ACTION:draft-shore-nat-reachability-00.txt

From: Pekka Savola <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 08:20:49 +0300 (EEST)

This I-D does not even mention IPv6 -- any particular reason for not 
to? :-)

Until now, it seems there have been at least 5-10 different NAT 
traversing/reversing techniques, designed for about every application 
requiring it.  But doing NAT traversal to get IPv6 connectivity would 
have provided a unified solution to every application...

On Fri, 26 Mar 2004 [email-masked] wrote:
> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
> 
> 
> 	Title		: Establishing Reachability Behind NATs
> 	Author(s)	: M. Shore
> 	Filename	: draft-shore-nat-reachability-00.txt
> 	Pages		: 14
> 	Date		: 2004-3-26
> 	
> One of the most persistent, difficult problems introduced with NATs
>      is voluntary reachability -- a NATted device making itself avail-
>      able to the public internet.  This paper is an overview of the cur-
>      rent status of reachability, a decomposition of the problem and a
>      proposal for going forward.
> 
> A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-shore-nat-reachability-00.txt

-- 
Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings

---

From: Melinda Shore <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 08:44:48 -0500

> This I-D does not even mention IPv6 -- any particular reason for not

Several, but I'm not sure any of them are any good.

The first is ignorance on my part - I'm not sure I have a sufficient
grasp on the scenarios in which it would be needed to be able to
describe something that's not just plain bogus ("here's how to solve
a problem that doesn't exist and nobody cares about").  Another is that
it's my impression that there's not a shortage of v4<->v6 transition
tools; that in fact there's an overabundance of them and it's
led to some incoherence.  However, it's undoubtedly worthwhile to
talk about how to establish "findability" for addresses and/or
address/port/protocol tuples acquired by whatever transition
mechanism is being used at the moment.  Does that exist already?
Any thoughts on this would be much appreciated.

Melinda