70 likes | 96 Views
Native NAT Traversal Mode for the Host Identity Protocol. draft-keranen-hip-native-nat-traversal-00 Ari Keränen March 25th, 2010 HIP WG, 77th IETF, Anaheim, CA. Background. RFC 5770: NAT traversal based on ICE, STUN & TURN (draf-ietf-hip-nat-traversal)
E N D
Native NAT Traversal Mode for the Host Identity Protocol draft-keranen-hip-native-nat-traversal-00 Ari Keränen March 25th, 2010 HIP WG, 77th IETF, Anaheim, CA
Background • RFC 5770: NAT traversal based on ICE, STUN & TURN (draf-ietf-hip-nat-traversal) • UDP encapsulation of HIP signaling and data (ESP) packets • HIP relay server for signaling traffic and TURN server for data relaying • STUN messages for ICE connectivity checks • Idea: re-use STUN/TURN infrastructure • Using TURN requires implementing STUN; not much effort to implement ICE too
ICE STUN Mode (RFC 5770) HIP relay server HIP relay server 3. BeX (HIP) 1. (HIP) TURN server TURN server 1. (HIP) 2. (TURN) 2. (TURN) I R 4. ICE checks (STUN)
Why New NAT Traversal Mode? • ICE implementation overhead • More messages (different format) • More state machines • More chances for bugs • Increased binary size • Widespread TURN infra yet to be seen • Architectural beauty
Native NAT Traversal Mode • Re-uses most of the RFC 5770 • HIP relay server for HIP signaling • NAT traversal mode negotiation • UDP encapsulation • ICE methodology and algorithms • HIP messages instead of STUN • ESP relay instead of TURN for HIP data • Also TURN can be used for relaying
Native NAT Traversal Mode HIP relay server HIP relay server 3. BeX (HIP) 1. (HIP) HIP datarelay HIP datarelay 1. (HIP) 2. (HIP) 2. (HIP) I R 4. ICE checks (HIP)
Way Forward • Data relaying needs some more work • Changing password authentication to certificate based authentication • Should the WG work on this? • Perhaps the mode for standards track HIP?