Re: issue 34 -- ESP vs. IKE based NAT reboot detection

On Tue, 2005-08-16 at 09:04, Jari Arkko wrote:
> Alt 1: The approach in -01 which retains what IKEv2 does
> when NAT mappings change. I.e., there's a SHOULD in the
> IKEv2 spec that allows implementations to update mappings
> based on what they see happening for the UDP-encapsulated
> ESP packets.
> 
> Alt 3: Tero's approach, which says not to use this feature
> in IKEv2 when MOBIKE is employed, and instead relies on
> periodic IKE probes.

Assume you're implementing both IKEv2 NAT traversal as well as mobike,
with mobike use being optional.

Either alternative presumably needs a notification from ESP to key
management that NAT-level "motion" has been detected, but alternative 3
also seems to require a "mode bit" in ESP indicating when you should let
ESP handle the address updates and when it should ignore them.

I'd rather avoid that complexity.

						- Bill