Subject: [midcom] [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-jennings-midcom-stun-results-00.txt]

From: Jonathan Rosenberg <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 14:57:50 -0500

This is a great piece of work. Thanks to Cullen for putting this together.

One conclusion I draw from this is that, as STUN itself predicts, the 
NAT classification algorithm is brittle because it makes assumptions 
about the types of NATs and there behaviors. We are now seeing NATs that 
have this dual behavior, depending on whether the internal port is 
allocated or not, and STUN's detection algorithm does not take this into 
account. Indeed, I would be inclined to work on reivising STUN, and in 
such a revision, remove the detection algorithm and explain why that was 
done. What do people think of that?

To me, this also further strengthens the arguments behind something like 
ICE (http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mmusic-ice-00.txt), 
which uses STUN, but does *not* use the detection algorithm. Rather, it 
relies on dynamic connectivity checks to figure out whether an address 
works or not. The argument there is that, ultimately, the only way to 
know whether you can receive media sent from address A to interface X is 
if you can receive a packet from address A sent to interface X. Any 
other way of verifying this conclusion is based on assumptions that can 
be wrong.

Thanks,
Jonathan R.
-- 
Jonathan D. Rosenberg, Ph.D.                600 Lanidex Plaza
Chief Technology Officer                    Parsippany, NJ 07054-2711
dynamicsoft
[email-masked]                     FAX:   (973) 952-5050
http://www.jdrosen.net                      PHONE: (973) 952-5000
http://www.dynamicsoft.com

Subject: I-D ACTION:draft-jennings-midcom-stun-results-00.txt
From: [email-masked]
To: IETF-Announce: ;
Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 08:16:06 -0500

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts
directories.

	Title		: NAT Classification Results using STUN
	Author(s)	: C. Jennings
	Filename	: draft-jennings-midcom-stun-results-00.txt
	Pages		: 9
	Date		: 2004-2-9
	
IETF has several groups that are considering the impact of NATs on
various protocols. Having a classification of the types of NATs that
are being developed and deployed is useful in gauging the impact of
various solutions. This draft records the results of classifying NATs
using the STUN protocol.

This work is being discussed on the [email-masked] mailing list.

A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-jennings-midcom-stun-results-00.txt

To remove yourself from the IETF Announcement list, send a message to 
ietf-announce-request with the word unsubscribe in the body of the message.

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the username
"anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in,
type "cd internet-drafts" and then
	"get draft-jennings-midcom-stun-results-00.txt".

A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html 
or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt

Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail.

Send a message to:
	[email-masked].
In the body type:
	"FILE /internet-drafts/draft-jennings-midcom-stun-results-00.txt".
	
NOTE:	The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in
	MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility.  To use this
	feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE"
	command.  To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or
	a MIME-compliant mail reader.  Different MIME-compliant mail readers
	exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with
	"multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split
	up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on
	how to manipulate these messages.

Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader
implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the
Internet-Draft.