Two comments:

1. The draft seems to imply that only tunnel initiator is allowed to initiate 
TCP session,  however what is behavior after TCP connection is lost and 
initiator need to re-create it? does it do it right away or only re-create TCP 
session when initiator need to send some packet? I assume it should be right 
away, because otherwise there will be traffic loss if the responder need to 
send packet before the TCP session is re-created;
So if my above understanding is correct, I'd like draft to clearly state the 
behavior; 


2. section 6 mention that implementation should be able to receive from any TCP 
session and not enforcing any strict mapping; that's fine for receiving, 
however for sending traffic, system (specially responder) still  need to know 
which TCP session to use to reach peer of a given SA; for example, If NAT is 
detected, then in case of TCP session is lost on initiator side but still 
exists on responder side and initiator re-create the TCP session, the new TCP 
session might have a different NAT public port or even different NAT public 
address, so the responder can't tell if the new TCP session is for an existing 
SA or a new tunnel, this means initiator need to send message for all existing 
SA that need to use the new TCP session so that responder could update its 
SA-to-TCP session mapping because otherwise responder might use the old TCP 
session for outgoing traffic of existing SA and traffic will be blackholed; in 
section 6, draft states that either UPDATE_SA_ADDRESS or a IKE keepalive could 
be used, however there is no specification of behavior for updating CHILD_SA 
mapping when MOBIKE is not supported;  maybe initiator should send some kind of 
dummy packet over the CHILD_SA to update responder's mapping?


> -----Original Message-----
> From: IPsec [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Tommy Pauly
> Sent: Monday, October 31, 2016 9:01 AM
> To: IPsecME WG
> Subject: [IPsec] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ipsecme-tcp-encaps-03.txt
> 
> Hello,
> 
> I’ve posted a new version of the TCP encapsulation draft with the following
> changes:
> 
> 1. Added a section to explicitly discuss how to fallback from UDP to TCP
> (retransmissions, etc) based on feedback from the charter discussion 2.
> Explained that this method of encapsulation can be used for any stream
> protocol, and is not TCP specific, based on feedback from the charter
> discussion 3. Clarified the use of multiple TCP connections for Child SAs,
> based on Jun Hu’s questions
> 
> Also, I’m happy to say that we’ve been doing interoperability testing between
> Apple clients and Cisco server for TCP encapsulation. If anyone else has an
> implementation they’d like to try out, please let us know!
> 
> Best,
> Tommy
> 
> > On Oct 31, 2016, at 8:56 AM, [email protected] wrote:
> >
> >
> > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts
> directories.
> > This draft is a work item of the IP Security Maintenance and Extensions of
> the IETF.
> >
> >        Title           : TCP Encapsulation of IKE and IPsec Packets
> >        Authors         : Tommy Pauly
> >                          Samy Touati
> >                          Ravi Mantha
> >     Filename        : draft-ietf-ipsecme-tcp-encaps-03.txt
> >     Pages           : 20
> >     Date            : 2016-10-31
> >
> > Abstract:
> >   This document describes a method to transport IKE and IPsec packets
> >   over a TCP connection for traversing network middleboxes that may
> >   block IKE negotiation over UDP.  This method, referred to as TCP
> >   encapsulation, involves sending both IKE packets for tunnel
> >   establishment as well as tunneled packets using ESP over a TCP
> >   connection.  This method is intended to be used as a fallback option
> >   when IKE cannot be negotiated over UDP.
> >
> >
> > The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
> > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ipsecme-tcp-encaps/
> >
> > There's also a htmlized version available at:
> > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ipsecme-tcp-encaps-03
> >
> > A diff from the previous version is available at:
> > https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-ipsecme-tcp-encaps-03
> >
> >
> > Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of
> > submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at 
> > tools.ietf.org.
> >
> > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
> > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > IPsec mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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