90 likes | 213 Views
ID-LOC Proposal. Philip Matthews Eric Cooper Alan Johnston Avaya With contributions from Cullen Jennings, David Bryan, and Bruce Lowekamp. Not a Peer Protocol proposal !. ID-LOC = proposed addition to the Peer Protocol (i.e., Reload or whatever). ID-LOC = Some selected ideas from HIP
E N D
ID-LOC Proposal Philip Matthews Eric Cooper Alan Johnston Avaya With contributions from Cullen Jennings, David Bryan, and Bruce Lowekamp
Not a Peer Protocol proposal ! • ID-LOC = proposed addition to the Peer Protocol (i.e., Reload or whatever). • ID-LOC = • Some selected ideas from HIP • Plus a few new ideas
Relationship to HIP • Take from HIP: • Identifiers that look like IP addresses • NAT traversal done once for all apps • TCP over UDP (for NAT traversal) • Not taken (for now): • HIP signaling (use Peer Protocol instead) • Encrypting all data packets using ESP • New: • Domain names for peers
What ID-LOC allows N A T N A T earth.example.com Overlay Example.com saturn.example.com Browser Web server
Tech Details in 3 slides (1) • Assign domain names to overlays and peers: • saturn.example.com • DHT holds mapping between peer’s domain name and peer’s peer ID saturn.example.com => 0xA3F26E…
Tech Details in 3 slides (2) • Applications don’t use Peer IDs directly. Instead, use special IP addresses (LSIs). • An LSI is a ‘shorthand’ for a Peer ID • Unlike peer IDs, an LSI can be used anywhere a real IP address can be used • Taken from special address range • ORCHID range (RFC 4843) for IPv6 • Perhaps 1.x.x.x for IPv4
Tech Details in 3 slides (3) • NAT Traversal (ICE, etc) done for all applications by Peer Protocol (w/ ID-LOC extensions) • Apps don’t need to worry about this • Application data + transport protocol encapsulated inside UDP for NAT traversal reasons HTTP TCP UDP IP
Implementation • One option is to implement using standard VPN client implementation techniques.
Advantages • Turns a p2p overlay into a VPN • Like VPNs, applications don’t need to change to work in an overlay • Preserves the existing user interface (= domain names) and existing application interface (= sockets and use of IP addresses) • NAT traversal handled in one place • Apps don’t need NAT traversal code • No need for endless “ICE for protocol X” drafts