RE: NAT Traversal

["Henrik Levkowetz" <henrik@levkowetz.com>]

Srini wrote:
> 
> Solution 3:
>      I had gone through midcom documents. It seems that midcom
>      NAT traversal is different from what we are trying to 
>      achieve.

Yes, traversal solutions through existing NATs does not seem to
be in their charter.

> 
>      But mobileIP working group NAT traversal is similar to what
>      we are discussing here. 
> 
>      Is there any interest in using mobileIP nat traversal?
>      It seems that, it works even if IPSEC device gets the
>      private IP address from the local service provider.
>      It works with any other applications too. 
> 
>      No changes to IPSEC/IKE and NAT boxes. Once mobile IP is
>      implemented on both ends of communication, it should work.

It DOES work. I'm running IPsec over MIP through NATs every day.
But the deployment and byte overhead may seem a bit high?

	Best,
		Henrik