SG, please mention these points in the text.

On Thu, Jan 4, 2024 at 8:38 AM Padma Pillay-Esnault <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Hi Martin
>
> Please see PPE for my comments inline
>
> On Tue, Jan 2, 2024 at 11:50 AM Martin Duke via Datatracker <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Martin Duke has entered the following ballot position for
>> charter-ietf-lisp-04-06: Block
>>
>> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
>> email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
>> introductory paragraph, however.)
>>
>>
>>
>> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-lisp/
>>
>>
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> BLOCK:
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Is the NAT traversal work going to prioritize existing solutions (e.g.
>> STUN,
>> TURN, ICE), or have all those already been determined to be inadequate?
>> If the
>> latter, LISP should coordinate with TSVWG on its NAT traversal solution.
>>
>> PPE - The symmetric or endpoint-address-and-port-dependent mapping NATs
>> (ICE, TURN..) have been  have been determined to be inadequate due to
>> the nature of LISP that is typically unidirectional traffic and its usage
>> of UDP port 4341 without specification of source port.
>>
> Yes - on coordination with TSVWG.
>>
>
>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> COMMENT:
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Is the reliable transport protocol required to be secure? (e.g., are you
>> looking at TCP/TLS, QUIC, and SCTP/DTLS, or just bare TCP/SCTP)
>>
>> PPE - The current reliable transport draft has a proposal for the use of
>> bare TCP and fallback to UDP using the existing mechanisms for security in
>> LISP. The document is being evaluated and reviewed.
>>
>>
> Thanks
> Padma
>
_______________________________________________
lisp mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp

Reply via email to