Re: issue 1: direct or indirect indicators

 In your previous mail you wrote:

   >  In your previous mail you wrote:
   > 
   >    a separate question but also of interest: 
   >    - should a peer send an address list in one message or 
   > individual messages
   >    (which only contain one address/message)?
   >      (the address list does not work in a nat environment.)
   >      answer: both seems to be desired. 
   > 
   > => as I don't like the idea to mix MOBIKE and NAT-T I am in 
   > favor of one message which can be submitted to the 
   > authorization procedure once and gives less exchanges. Of 
   > course this doesn't make the one address/message impossible.
   
   having an address list in the ike message makes nat handling impossible. 
   
=> now I see: you speak about the first message when I speak about
NAT prevention in the first message and address list in the next
exchange.
I've already explained this but I used NAT prevention for two purposes:
 - make the choice between either NAT traversal and MOBIKE clear
 - inject the peer addresses from the header into a protected space
BTW the first point is Pasi's idea, and it has the extra advantage
to be outside of the NAT traversal IPR.

Thanks

[email protected]