RE: Teredo vs Silkroad

["Bound, Jim" <jim.bound@hp.com>]

Silkroad defines a protocol within UDP to discover routers.  That is new
IMO.  And worth discussion.
/jim 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org 
> [mailto:owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org] On Behalf Of JF Tremblay
> Sent: Friday, May 21, 2004 12:04 PM
> To: rengrong wang; v6ops@ops.ietf.org
> Subject: Re: Teredo vs Silkroad
> 
> --On May 21, 2004 2:31 PM +0800 rengrong wang 
> <rengronw@usc.edu> wrote:
> 
> > Hi,
> >
> > In draft-liumin-v6ops-silkroad-01.txt it is said that 
> Silkroad wants 
> > to enable nodes located behind one or several IPv4 NATs to 
> obtain IPv6 
> > connectivity and it seems like a tunnel-broker solution.  
> It is known 
> > that Teredo is a automatic tunnel mechanism that figures 
> out the same 
> > problem.
> >
> > What's the difference between Silkroad and Teredo?
> 
> IMHO, Silkroad is simply another protocol based on tunnel 
> broker/server model (RFC3053) with an optimization to make 
> two hosts on the same link realize they can talk directly. 
> Teredo on the other hand allows hosts implementing a Teredo 
> client to exchange directly through NATs, except symmetric 
> ones. However traffic to hosts not implementing a Teredo 
> client must go through a relay.
> 
> At first sight, Silkroad doesn't seem to offer any 
> significant improvement over TSP, except the 
> nodes-on-same-link optimization. Both support NAT traversal 
> with any type of NAT, including nested ones. However TSP 
> doesn't require the use of a web page, offers prefix 
> delegation, authentication and has a solid experimental 
> background since it's been deployed for over 5 years to more 
> than 100000 users.
> 
> The question sparking in my mind from this is whether of not 
> the detection of two tunneled hosts on the same link would be 
> a desirable feature to include in the tunnel broker model. It 
> involves the broker telling a host what is the public IPv4 
> address and port of another host, which may be a security 
> issue. However with Teredo this information is already 
> included in the IPv6 address, so I guess it would provide the 
> same level of security.
> 
> > Best regards,
> >
> > Crisy(Rengrong) Wang
> > =======================================
> > USC,EE-Systems
> >
> >
> 
> Jean-Francois Tremblay
> Hexago
> -------------------------------------------------
> http://www.freenet6.net : Free IPv6 Connectivity
> -------------------------------------------------
> "Computer Science is no more about computers than astronomy 
> is about telescopes" - E. W. Dijkstra
> -------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
>