Presence and IntComm WG

[Steve Blair <>]

Candace Holman wrote:

> Ben Teitelbaum wrote:
>
> > Candace Holman 
> > <>
> >  writes:
> >
> >  
> >
> > >   7. Middleware support such as NAT, STUN, and ICE to soothe
> > >      end-to-end demons like firewalls and session border controllers
> > >     
> >
> >
> > This could probably be better phrased.  NAT is an end-to-end demon,
> > not a palliative, while some would argue that SBCs are a necessary
> > evil (e.g. for implementing CALEA).  Furthermore, ICE is not really
> > middleware; it's and end-system algorithm for NAT traversal. 
> > I'm not even sure that NAT and firewall traversal deserve to be in
> > scope.  How about we scratch this one and replace it with:
> >
> >   7. SIP/SIMPLE over IPv6   
>
> I think IPv6 (IPsec?) has nothing to do with NAT traversal solutions, 
> except to replace them.  IPv6 seems to have lost the battle (not the 
> war).   Do you really want to push for IPv6, seeing how it has lost 
> the battle?  I can add it as a feature if you like, but wouldn't 
> replace the original.  I'll change the wording to
> 7. Traversal techniques such as TURN, STUN, and ICE to make SIP/SIMPLE 
> behave with NAT, firewalls, and SBCs.
I think I originally asked for IPv6 because we had an opportunity to 
peer with some of sites in Taiwan. However I think that opportunity has 
passed.

-Steve

> Candace