On Tue, 2004-06-15 at 21:41, Internet-Drafts@ietf.org wrote: > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. > > > Title : IPv6 Tunnel Broker with the Tunnel Setup Protocol(TSP) <SNIP> Things I am wondering about(tm): "2.1 NAT Discovery" It mentions to choose UDP over IPv4, is there a spec of this protocol? Also it mentions that it will pick 'the most effective protocol even in dynamic situations when the clients moves', which one is that? In: "On the IPv6 layer, if the client uses user authentication, the same IPv6 address and prefix are kept and re-established. On the IPv6 layer, there is no change of address." The last sentence is a duplicate or clarification I assume? "If there is no IPv4 NAT is detected in the path by the TSP server, then IPv6 over IPv4 encapsulation is used." Reprase to "If no IPv4 is detected in the path..." Note that there are *many* ISP/transits that blindly filter proto-41 and then the tunnel will not work. Of course they could also filter UDP for that matter... "2.3 Mobility", would it not be easier and more effective to use heartbeats here? Renegotiating all the parameters would cause a delay and cause packets to be dropped. "3. Advantages of TSP" Advantages over what? There is no other Tunnel Setup Protocol defined :) For 4.x: What was actually the reason for not picking a full HTTP/1.1 or SOAP protocol? Implementing clients would then be much easier as many HTTP clients already exist also that could allow Apache (or IIS ;) for instance to be used as a server. The Security Considerations should note that due to the many spoof-open networks it is very easy to inject a packet into the network stream of v6udpv4 packets and pose as the original sender. One could thus easily disrupt the tunnel. Same for proto-41 tunnels. Also see http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-47/presentations/ripe47-ipv6-tunnel-disco.pdf Greets, Jeroen
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part