North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: IPv6 NAT

  • From: Owen DeLong
  • Date: Sat Nov 01 13:45:16 2003

I think Paul Timmins covered it rather well.

Owen


--On Saturday, November 1, 2003 11:56 AM -0600 Shawn Morris <[email protected]> wrote:

Owen DeLong wrote:

That probably means they are not using SIP, but, instead are using
either H.323 or some other proprietary ugliness.  That's unfortunate.

SIP has to include the IP address of the RTP destination in it's payload.
As such, you can't use SIP cleanly across NAT unless the NAT box knows
to proxy the SIP and edit the payload (very messy).
Well, VOIP is not my area of expertise, but Vonage is using SIP and we
have some of our engineers who are using our internal VOIP/SIP network
behind a NAT device.

In any case, Vonage aside, lots of things that the average user will
eventually consider useful are broken by NAT and NAT is an unnecessary
ugliness in most places where it is used.

It should _NOT_ be encouraged.

Owen


--On Saturday, November 1, 2003 11:33 AM -0600 Shawn Morris
<[email protected]> wrote:

Owen DeLong wrote:

If you are telling me that Joe User will never use VOIP, then you are
somking from a different internet hooka than the folks at Vonage.  I
don't know which of you is right, but, I know Vonage has enough
customers to say that at least some number of Joe User's are using SIP
and RTP which are among the protocols broken by NAT.  Next?
Vonage's SIP implementation is not broken by NAT and in fact Vonage
recommends that you purchase a SOHO router that does NAT.


Owen





--
If it wasn't signed, it probably didn't come from me.

Attachment: pgp00001.pgp
Description: PGP signature