Joe,
> On 27 Aug 2018, at 10:27, Joe Touch <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
>> On Aug 26, 2018, at 11:55 PM, Ole Troan <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> Joe,
>>
>>>>
>>>>> On 26 Aug 2018, at 23:12, Joe Touch <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> As I’ve mentioned, there are rules under which a NAT is a valid Internet
>>>>> device, but it is simply not just a router.
>>>>
>>>> If there really was, can you point to where those rules are? Describing
>>>> the behavior of the host stack and applications?
>>>
>>> The principles are described and explained here:
>>>
>>> Touch, J: Middlebox Models Compatible with the Internet. USC/ISI
>>> (ISI-TR-711), 2016. (
>>>
>>
>> I don’t want to dismiss this completely, but it hand waves over how
>> applications are supposed to work in this new Internet architecture.
>> You can define your way out of breaking end-to-end, but that doesn’t mean
>> you can ignore all the issues of NAT traversal.
>
> You’ve missed the point - if the middleboxes describe behave as required,
> apps do not need to change. They work as they would in an Internet without
> those boxes.
Quite likely.
Do you have a document describing how my SIP application works?
Ore are you saying PCP, ICE, TURN etc is part of your architecture?
Cheers
Ole
_______________________________________________
Int-area mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
