draft-ietf-mmusic-rtsp-nat-evaluation-03.txt   draft-ietf-mmusic-rtsp-nat-evaluation-04.txt 
Network Working Group M. Westerlund Network Working Group M. Westerlund
Internet-Draft Ericsson Internet-Draft Ericsson
Intended status: Informational T. Zeng Intended status: Informational T. Zeng
Expires: September 15, 2011 March 14, 2011 Expires: April 29, 2012 October 27, 2011
The Evaluation of Different Network Addres Translator (NAT) Traversal The Evaluation of Different Network Addres Translator (NAT) Traversal
Techniques for Media Controlled by Real-time Streaming Protocol (RTSP) Techniques for Media Controlled by Real-time Streaming Protocol (RTSP)
draft-ietf-mmusic-rtsp-nat-evaluation-03 draft-ietf-mmusic-rtsp-nat-evaluation-04
Abstract Abstract
This document describes several Network Address Translator (NAT) This document describes several Network Address Translator (NAT)
traversal techniques that was considered to be used by Real-time traversal techniques that was considered to be used by Real-time
Streaming Protocol (RTSP). Each technique includes a description on Streaming Protocol (RTSP). Each technique includes a description on
how it would be used, the security implications of using it and any how it would be used, the security implications of using it and any
other deployment considerations it has. There are also disussions on other deployment considerations it has. There are also disussions on
how NAT traversal techniques relates to firewalls and how each how NAT traversal techniques relates to firewalls and how each
technique can be applied in different use cases. These findings technique can be applied in different use cases. These findings
skipping to change at page 1, line 39 skipping to change at page 1, line 39
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on September 15, 2011. This Internet-Draft will expire on April 29, 2012.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2011 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2011 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved. document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents publication of this document. Please review these documents
skipping to change at page 24, line 42 skipping to change at page 24, line 42
could be increased. To achieve a longer random tag while still using could be increased. To achieve a longer random tag while still using
RTP and RTCP, it will be necessary to develop RTP and RTCP payload RTP and RTCP, it will be necessary to develop RTP and RTCP payload
formats for carrying the random tag. formats for carrying the random tag.
4.3.5. A Variation to Symmetric RTP 4.3.5. A Variation to Symmetric RTP
Symmetric RTP requires a valid RTP format in the FW packet, which is Symmetric RTP requires a valid RTP format in the FW packet, which is
the first packet that the client sends to the server to set up the first packet that the client sends to the server to set up
virtual RTP connection. There is currently no appropriate RTP packet virtual RTP connection. There is currently no appropriate RTP packet
format for this purpose, although the No-Op format is a proposal to format for this purpose, although the No-Op format is a proposal to
fix the problem [I-D.ietf-avt-rtp-no-op]. There exist a document fix the problem [I-D.ietf-avt-rtp-no-op]. There exists a RFC that
that discusses the implication of different type of packets as keep- discusses the implication of different type of packets as keep-alives
alives for RTP [I-D.ietf-avt-app-rtp-keepalive] and its findings are for RTP [RFC6263] and its findings are very relevant to the FW
very relevant to the FW packet. packet.
Meanwhile, there has been FW traversal techniques deployed in the Meanwhile, there has been FW traversal techniques deployed in the
wireless streaming market place that use non-RTP messages as FW wireless streaming market place that use non-RTP messages as FW
packets. This section attempts to summarize a subset of those packets. This section attempts to summarize a subset of those
solutions that happens to use a variation to the standard symmetric solutions that happens to use a variation to the standard symmetric
RTP solution. RTP solution.
In this variation of symmetric RTP, the FW packet is a small UDP In this variation of symmetric RTP, the FW packet is a small UDP
packet that does not contain RTP header. Hence the solution can no packet that does not contain RTP header. Hence the solution can no
longer be called symmetric RTP, yet it employs the same technique for longer be called symmetric RTP, yet it employs the same technique for
skipping to change at page 35, line 41 skipping to change at page 35, line 41
are: Jonathan Rosenberg, Philippe Gentric, Tom Marshall, David Yon, are: Jonathan Rosenberg, Philippe Gentric, Tom Marshall, David Yon,
Amir Wolf, Anders Klemets, and Colin Perkins. Thomas Zeng would also Amir Wolf, Anders Klemets, and Colin Perkins. Thomas Zeng would also
like to give special thanks to Greg Sherwood of PacketVideo for his like to give special thanks to Greg Sherwood of PacketVideo for his
input into this memo. input into this memo.
Section Section 1.1 contains text originally written for RFC 4787 by Section Section 1.1 contains text originally written for RFC 4787 by
Francois Audet and Cullen Jennings. Francois Audet and Cullen Jennings.
10. Informative References 10. Informative References
[I-D.ietf-avt-app-rtp-keepalive]
Marjou, X. and A. Sollaud, "Application Mechanism for
keeping alive the Network Address Translator (NAT)
mappings associated to RTP/RTCP flows.",
draft-ietf-avt-app-rtp-keepalive-10 (work in progress),
March 2011.
[I-D.ietf-avt-rtp-no-op] [I-D.ietf-avt-rtp-no-op]
Andreasen, F., "A No-Op Payload Format for RTP", Andreasen, F., "A No-Op Payload Format for RTP",
draft-ietf-avt-rtp-no-op-04 (work in progress), May 2007. draft-ietf-avt-rtp-no-op-04 (work in progress), May 2007.
[I-D.ietf-mmusic-rfc2326bis] [I-D.ietf-mmusic-rfc2326bis]
Schulzrinne, H., Rao, A., Lanphier, R., Westerlund, M., Schulzrinne, H., Rao, A., Lanphier, R., Westerlund, M.,
and M. Stiemerling, "Real Time Streaming Protocol 2.0 and M. Stiemerling, "Real Time Streaming Protocol 2.0
(RTSP)", draft-ietf-mmusic-rfc2326bis-27 (work in (RTSP)", draft-ietf-mmusic-rfc2326bis-27 (work in
progress), March 2011. progress), March 2011.
skipping to change at page 37, line 26 skipping to change at page 37, line 20
October 2008. October 2008.
[RFC5766] Mahy, R., Matthews, P., and J. Rosenberg, "Traversal Using [RFC5766] Mahy, R., Matthews, P., and J. Rosenberg, "Traversal Using
Relays around NAT (TURN): Relay Extensions to Session Relays around NAT (TURN): Relay Extensions to Session
Traversal Utilities for NAT (STUN)", RFC 5766, April 2010. Traversal Utilities for NAT (STUN)", RFC 5766, April 2010.
[RFC6062] Perreault, S. and J. Rosenberg, "Traversal Using Relays [RFC6062] Perreault, S. and J. Rosenberg, "Traversal Using Relays
around NAT (TURN) Extensions for TCP Allocations", around NAT (TURN) Extensions for TCP Allocations",
RFC 6062, November 2010. RFC 6062, November 2010.
[RFC6263] Marjou, X. and A. Sollaud, "Application Mechanism for
Keeping Alive the NAT Mappings Associated with RTP / RTP
Control Protocol (RTCP) Flows", RFC 6263, June 2011.
[STUN-IMPL] [STUN-IMPL]
"Open Source STUN Server and Client, http:// "Open Source STUN Server and Client, http://
www.vovida.org/applications/downloads/stun/index.html", www.vovida.org/applications/downloads/stun/index.html",
June 2007. June 2007.
Authors' Addresses Authors' Addresses
Magnus Westerlund Magnus Westerlund
Ericsson Ericsson
Farogatan 6 Farogatan 6
 End of changes. 6 change blocks. 
14 lines changed or deleted 11 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.41. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/