[support] Re: [Dsmip] NAT Traversal is not working as mentioned in DSMIPv6 draft

[NGUYEN Duc Kien]

Hi,

        a. If BU packet is getting UDP encapsulated in IPv4 network, then why not the BA getting encapsulated in UDP. I think both BU and BA, will use the same UDP                     encapsulation/decapsulation code, then why the behavior is not same.

We can use xfrm to encapsulate BU and BA in UDP, by applying the same principle. All the routines necessary are already implemented from Dsmipv6 first release (in src/xfrm.c). You can send email to Nassim for more information.
I think that the data encapsulation is more difficult to do, especially for the multiple CoA.
 
        b. UDP encapsulation is implemented in kernel. So the changes to support encapsulation of BA will require kernel changes also?
 No, xfrm on userland will send the requests to the kernel.
 
Regards,
Kien.



________________________________
From: manish Jamwal <manish.jamwal at gmail.com>
To: Sebastien Decugis <sdecugis at hongo.wide.ad.jp>
Cc: support at ml.nautilus6.org; NGUYEN Duc Kien <kien.duc-nguyen at univ-paris8.fr>; dsmip at ml.nautilus6.org
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 9:31:37 AM
Subject: Re: [Dsmip] NAT Traversal is not working as mentioned in DSMIPv6 draft


Thanks Seb for quick response.

Yes, I need this feature and willing to look further into daemon code to come with solution. Need some starting pointers from you. Currently I have two question in mind.

a. If BU packet is getting UDP encapsulated in IPv4 network, then why not the BA getting encapsulated in UDP. I think both BU and BA, will use the same UDP encapsulation/decapsulation code, then why the behavior is not same.

b. UDP encapsulation is implemented in kernel. So the changes to support encapsulation of BA will require kernel changes also?

Regards
Manish Jamwal


On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 1:34 PM, Sebastien Decugis <sdecugis at hongo.wide.ad.jp> wrote:

Hello,

As far as I remember, the implementation is not complete for the NAT
encapsulation part. You should check the code of the daemon, and try to
complete it, if you need this feature. Anyway, it might not be conform
to the latest revisions of the DSMIP specification, either... Some work
is probably needed on the daemon, and you are welcome if you're willing
to provide this work ;)

Best regards,
Sebastien.

manish Jamwal a écrit :

> Hi Kien
>
> NAT Detection seems fine, but the problem is coming in NAT Traversal.
> The problem statement is mentioned below:
>
> If NAT is detected, the binding acknowledgement, and all future
> packets, should then encapsulated in UDP and IPv4. Which is not
> happening in the current mipv6 code, I have applied all the ipv4
> patches ( mentioned in DSMIPv6 mailing list ). Only BU packets are
> getting udp encapsulated, when MN is in IPv4
> network. Please provide some pointer...
>
> Regards
> Manish Jamwal
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Dsmip mailing list
> Dsmip at ml.nautilus6.org
> http://ml.nautilus6.org/mailman/listinfo/dsmip
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://ml.nautilus6.org/pipermail/support/attachments/20090225/a2cf4852/attachment-0002.htm