Subject: [NSIS] Problem with NAT-Traversal object

From: Christian Dickmann <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 11:52:57 +0100

Hi Robert,

I have a question regarding NAT Traversal in GIST ID 09. 
Section 5.1 tells me "The objects following the common header 
MUST be carried in a fixed order, depending on message type."
and for GIST-Reponse it states:

GIST-Response = Common-Header
                Message-Routing-Information
                Session-Identification
                ...

Now I had a look at section 7.2 regarding NAT Traversal and
how to handle the NAT traversal object. There the draft states:
"It MUST also include the NAT-Traversal object as the first 
object in the Response after the common header."

I wonder, why you did not include the NAT-Traversal object
in section 5.1. One reason might be, that you think of 
NAT-Traversal as an optional advanced feature of GIST.
But I think if this is the case the NAT Traversal section
should not change basic behaviour of section 5.1.
Reading section 5.1 one could take for granted, that 
you can expect the MRI to be the first object in any 
case. 

I suggest to include NAT Traversal in section 5.1 as
an optional object. I guess the rational for making
the NAT traversal object the first one after the common
header is that it is a kind of "replace" for the normal
MRI? The spec would therefore look like:

GIST-Response = Common-Header
                [ NAT-Traversal ]
                Message-Routing-Information
                Session-Identification
                ...

Christian Dickmann

_______________________________________________
nsis mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nsis

---

From: "Hancock, Robert" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 10:41:41 -0000

christian,

you are probably right that this could be clarified, including
the object as optional in 5.1 with a forward reference to 7.2.
(this applies to both the query and response messages.) i've
opened an new issue #104 to remind me of this when the time
comes.

cheers,

robert h.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Christian Dickmann [mailto:[email-masked]] 
> Sent: 21 February 2006 10:53
> To: [email-masked]
> Subject: [NSIS] Problem with NAT-Traversal object
> 
> 
> Hi Robert,
>