NAT and Firewall Traversal Issues of Host Identity Protocol (HIP) Communication
RFC 5207
Revision differences
Document history
| Date | Rev. | By | Action |
|---|---|---|---|
|
2017-05-16
|
04 | (System) | Changed document authors from "Martin Stiemerling" to "Martin Stiemerling, Lars Eggert, Juergen Quittek" |
|
2015-10-14
|
04 | (System) | Notify list changed from stiemerling@netlab.nec.de to (None) |
|
2012-08-22
|
04 | (System) | post-migration administrative database adjustment to the No Objection position for David Kessens |
|
2008-04-21
|
04 | Amy Vezza | State Changes to RFC Published from RFC Ed Queue by Amy Vezza |
|
2008-04-21
|
04 | Amy Vezza | [Note]: 'RFC 5207' added by Amy Vezza |
|
2008-04-18
|
04 | (System) | RFC published |
|
2008-04-17
|
04 | (System) | IANA Action state changed to No IC from In Progress |
|
2008-04-17
|
04 | (System) | IANA Action state changed to In Progress |
|
2008-04-04
|
04 | Amy Vezza | State Changes to RFC Ed Queue from Approved-announcement sent by Amy Vezza |
|
2008-03-27
|
04 | Amy Vezza | IESG state changed to Approved-announcement sent |
|
2008-03-27
|
04 | Amy Vezza | IESG has approved the document |
|
2008-03-27
|
04 | Amy Vezza | Closed "Approve" ballot |
|
2007-07-16
|
04 | Amy Vezza | State Changes to Approved-announcement to be sent from IESG Evaluation::AD Followup by Amy Vezza |
|
2007-07-12
|
04 | Mark Townsley | [Note]: 'Still stuck! Email sent to Aaron on 7/12/2007...' added by Mark Townsley |
|
2007-05-14
|
04 | Mark Townsley | State Changes to IESG Evaluation::AD Followup from IESG Evaluation by Mark Townsley |
|
2007-05-14
|
04 | Mark Townsley | State Changes to IESG Evaluation from IESG Evaluation::AD Followup by Mark Townsley |
|
2007-03-15
|
04 | Mark Townsley | [Note]: 'Ready to be advanced, email sent to secretariat.' added by Mark Townsley |
|
2007-03-07
|
04 | (System) | Sub state has been changed to AD Follow up from New Id Needed |
|
2007-03-07
|
04 | (System) | New version available: draft-irtf-hiprg-nat-04.txt |
|
2007-01-17
|
04 | Mark Townsley | State Changes to IESG Evaluation::Revised ID Needed from IESG Evaluation::AD Followup by Mark Townsley |
|
2007-01-15
|
04 | Mark Townsley | [Note]: 'Advancing according to: draft-irtf-rfcs-00.txt<br>Waiting on RFC Editor''s note modifying abstract according to david kessens'' discuss comment.' added by Mark Townsley |
|
2006-11-30
|
04 | Amy Vezza | State Changes to IESG Evaluation::AD Followup from IESG Evaluation by Amy Vezza |
|
2006-11-30
|
04 | David Kessens | [Ballot Position Update] Position for David Kessens has been changed to No Objection from Discuss by David Kessens |
|
2006-11-30
|
04 | Jari Arkko | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Jari Arkko |
|
2006-11-30
|
04 | Dan Romascanu | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Dan Romascanu |
|
2006-11-30
|
04 | Ross Callon | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Ross Callon |
|
2006-11-30
|
04 | Yoshiko Fong | IANA Evaluation Comment: No IANA Considerations section. This document appears to have NO IANA Actions. |
|
2006-11-30
|
04 | Ted Hardie | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Ted Hardie |
|
2006-11-29
|
04 | David Kessens | [Ballot discuss] draft-irtf-rfcs-00.txt says in section '2.1. Research Group Preparation': The document should have a statement in the abstract identifying the document as … [Ballot discuss] draft-irtf-rfcs-00.txt says in section '2.1. Research Group Preparation': The document should have a statement in the abstract identifying the document as the product of the RG and a paragraph in the first section describing the level of support for the document (e.g., "this document represents the consensus of the FOOBAR RG", "the views in this document were considered controversial by the FOOBAR RG but the RG reached a consensus that the document should still be published") and the breadth of review for the document. I cannot find any of this in the abstract. draft-irtf-rfcs-00.txt says in section '2.2. Document Shepherds': Documents should have a shepherd. I canot find any sign that there is a document shepherd |
|
2006-11-29
|
04 | David Kessens | [Ballot Position Update] Position for David Kessens has been changed to Discuss from Abstain by David Kessens |
|
2006-11-29
|
04 | David Kessens | [Ballot comment] This document does no harm whatsoever but I honestly wonder whether it is useful for anything. I have a hard time finding any … [Ballot comment] This document does no harm whatsoever but I honestly wonder whether it is useful for anything. I have a hard time finding any actual content in this document: The document says in section '2.2. Phase 2: ESP Data Exchange': This section focuses on the first category, i.e., NAT-intrinsic issues. The two other problem categories are out of this document's scope. They are addressed in the BEHAVE working group or in [RFC3489]. Two categories are out of scope, while the first category is NAT-intrinsic, that is, there is nothing unique about the fact that we are dealing here with HIP as opposed to IPsec or whatever else passing through a NAT. Section 4 & 5 are other nice examples of stating the obvious. Since this document comes out of the irtf, I wonder what the connection is with any 'research' done in the irtf as there is nothing new or research worthy in this document. |
|
2006-11-29
|
04 | David Kessens | [Ballot comment] This document does no harm whatsoever but I honestly wonder whether it is useful for anything. I have a hard time finding any … [Ballot comment] This document does no harm whatsoever but I honestly wonder whether it is useful for anything. I have a hard time finding any actual content in this document: The document says in section '2.2. Phase 2: ESP Data Exchange': This section focuses on the first category, i.e., NAT-intrinsic issues. The two other problem categories are out of this document's scope. They are addressed in the BEHAVE working group or in [RFC3489]. Two categories are out of scope, while the first category is NAT-intrinsic, that is, there is nothing unique about the fact that we are dealing here with HIP as opposed to IPsec or whatever else passing through a NAT. Section 4 & 5 are other nice examples of stating the obvious. Since this document comes out of the irtf, I wonder what the connection is with any 'research' done in the irtf. |
|
2006-11-29
|
04 | David Kessens | [Ballot Position Update] New position, Abstain, has been recorded by David Kessens |
|
2006-11-29
|
04 | Samuel Weiler | Request for Last Call review by SECDIR Completed. Reviewer: Eric Rescorla. |
|
2006-11-29
|
04 | Magnus Westerlund | [Ballot comment] Maybe not the best written document outthere. My primary concern is that it may in fact require some knowledge about the NAT/FW traversal … [Ballot comment] Maybe not the best written document outthere. My primary concern is that it may in fact require some knowledge about the NAT/FW traversal issues to understand correctly. The proposed solutions are also sometime a bit to vaguely described. |
|
2006-11-29
|
04 | Magnus Westerlund | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Magnus Westerlund |
|
2006-11-29
|
04 | Brian Carpenter | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Brian Carpenter |
|
2006-11-29
|
04 | Russ Housley | [Ballot comment] From the SecDir Review by Eric Rescorla: This document discusses the challenges of running HIP when one or both of the … [Ballot comment] From the SecDir Review by Eric Rescorla: This document discusses the challenges of running HIP when one or both of the parties is behind a NAT or Firewall. S 1. I'm not sure the NAT/ALG distinction you're promulgating here is that useful. Most things that people buy that are labelled "NAT" actually have some kind of ALG in them to modify things like DNS and FTP. So, the issue isn't ALG or not but rather how much ALG they have. S 2.1.1. I'm not sure I would structure this section this way. As you say, pure "basic NATs" are rare, so less text about them and more about the things that really occur would help. Given that you mention the topic of receivers behind a NAT, I think some mention of ICE would be appropriate. S 2.2. Is the idea here that this section only talks about HIP-specific stuff and that one should see 3715 for the ESP in general stuff? If not, this section needs to be a lot more complete. I haven't studied 3715 so can't say how complete that is. |
|
2006-11-29
|
04 | Russ Housley | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Russ Housley |
|
2006-11-27
|
04 | Lars Eggert | [Ballot Position Update] New position, Recuse, has been recorded by Lars Eggert |
|
2006-11-27
|
04 | Cullen Jennings | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Cullen Jennings |
|
2006-11-27
|
04 | Mark Townsley | [Note]: 'Advancing according to: draft-irtf-rfcs-00.txt' added by Mark Townsley |
|
2006-11-27
|
04 | Mark Townsley | [Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded for Mark Townsley |
|
2006-11-27
|
04 | Mark Townsley | Ballot has been issued by Mark Townsley |
|
2006-11-27
|
04 | Mark Townsley | Created "Approve" ballot |
|
2006-11-27
|
04 | (System) | Ballot writeup text was added |
|
2006-11-27
|
04 | (System) | Last call text was added |
|
2006-11-27
|
04 | (System) | Ballot approval text was added |
|
2006-11-27
|
04 | Mark Townsley | State Changes to IESG Evaluation from Publication Requested by Mark Townsley |
|
2006-11-25
|
04 | Samuel Weiler | Request for Last Call review by SECDIR is assigned to Eric Rescorla |
|
2006-11-25
|
04 | Samuel Weiler | Request for Last Call review by SECDIR is assigned to Eric Rescorla |
|
2006-11-20
|
04 | Dinara Suleymanova | Shepherding AD has been changed to Mark Townsley from Brian Carpenter |
|
2006-11-16
|
04 | Amy Vezza | Telechat date was changed to 2006-11-30 from 2006-11-16 by Amy Vezza |
|
2006-11-16
|
04 | Dinara Suleymanova | Draft Added by Dinara Suleymanova in state Publication Requested |
|
2006-06-08
|
03 | (System) | New version available: draft-irtf-hiprg-nat-03.txt |
|
2006-05-15
|
02 | (System) | New version available: draft-irtf-hiprg-nat-02.txt |
|
2006-01-31
|
01 | (System) | New version available: draft-irtf-hiprg-nat-01.txt |
|
2005-10-07
|
00 | (System) | New version available: draft-irtf-hiprg-nat-00.txt |