Re: Issue 34: Separate path test, handling changes in NAT mappings

 In your previous mail you wrote:

   Actually the original idea behind the charter was that MOBIKE would
   not do anything about NATs, i.e. if NAT is detected, then we do not
   use MOBIKE, but simply use normal NAT-T (note the "if any" in the text
   saying "MOBIKE should not be tightly coupled with the NAT traversal
   function, but it is necessary to specify in which cases (if any) they
   can be used together, and how they interact").

=> the original idea was the right one IMHO...

   This was already decided in the WG that we do want to use MOBIKE
   and NAT-T together.
   
=> and this even there is no real world case of MOBIKE+NAT-T...

   My understanding of the that charter text is that we are not allowed
   to modify actual UDP encapsulation part of the NAT-T, and we must use
   the NAT-T mechanisms in the IKEv2, but we can profile the NAT-T (i.e.
   say which features are mandatory to implement and which are not, or
   which features must be enabled or disabled).

=> if you mean that the NAT-T dynamic update is mandatory to implement
I agree!

Regards

[email protected]