I agree to what Yoav stated, that signalling part (SIP) and media part
(RTP) both SHOULD work even if there is NAT in the configuration today.
However, I could not get why we need to have new NAT traversal mechanism
using hub gateway, can you elaborate on this...

Thanks and Regards,
Yogendra Pal
Ericsson, India
+91-9686202644


On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 6:49 PM, Yoav Nir <[email protected]> wrote:

> "direct endpoint-to-endpoint connectivity may not be possible if both
> endpoints are NATed"
>
> Why?  There are several protocols (SIP/RTP come to mind) that manage
> endpoint-to-endpoint connectivity even when both are behind NAT. Why
> shouldn't IPsec endpoints do this?
>
> If this requires some new NAT traversal mechanism, perhaps using a hub
> gateway in place of the SIP SBC, then this should be part of the
> requirements.
>
> This mechanism is needed even if only one endpoint is NATted, otherwise
> we're constraining who the initiator has to be.
>
> Yoav
>
> On Mar 21, 2012, at 3:31 AM, Stephen Hanna wrote:
>
> > Another issue. Please comment on Suggested Resolution.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Steve
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ipsecme issue tracker [mailto:[email protected]]
> > Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2012 6:58 PM
> > To: [email protected];
> [email protected]
> > Subject: [ipsecme] #213: In use case 2.1, direct endpoint-to-endpoint
> connectivity may not be possible
> >
> > #213: In use case 2.1, direct endpoint-to-endpoint connectivity may not
> be
> > possible
> >
> > In use case 2.1, direct endpoint-to-endpoint connectivity may not be
> possible
> > if both endpoints are NATed.
> >
> > Suggested Resolution: Mention this in section 2.1.
> >
> > --
> >
> -------------------------+-------------------------------------------------
> >  Reporter:              |      Owner:  draft-ietf-ipsecme-p2p-vpn-
> >  yaronf.ietf@…          |  problem@…
> >      Type:  defect      |     Status:  new
> >  Priority:  normal      |  Milestone:
> > Component:  p2p-vpn-    |   Severity:  -
> >  problem                |   Keywords:
> > Resolution:              |
> >
> -------------------------+-------------------------------------------------
> >
> > Ticket URL: <
> http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/ipsecme/trac/ticket/213#comment:1>
> > ipsecme <http://tools.ietf.org/ipsecme/>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > IPsec mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec
> > IƧ��[�(^rC�{S�֥I�.�+r �^��
>
> _______________________________________________
> IPsec mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec
>



--
_______________________________________________
IPsec mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec

Reply via email to