[Nice] Nice Status

[Rémi Denis-Courmont]

	Hello,

On Monday 07 July 2008 15:33:31 ext Philippe HENSEL, you wrote:
> So if I understood well, actual version of NICE offers
> only STUN (client and server) and ICE agent.
> This means that it cannot offer better NAT traversal
> that STUN only solution
> (Full cone NAT/Restricted NAT/ Port Restristed NAT
> traversal but no Symmetric NAT traversal) ?

This very much depends on what you call "only STUN". Really "pure plain dumb" 
RFC3489 STUN can only do cone-to-cone NAT traversal. Of course some people 
add unilateral hole punching to it, but then it is not STUN only anymore.

Using your terminology, ICE supports traversal between pairs of port 
restricted NATs, and traversal between symmetric NATs and restricted NATs. 
But it is well known that this terminology is inadequate:
http://www.plugndial.com/draft-jennings-midcom-stun-results-02.txt
http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc4787.html (especially section 8)

ICE adds reliable error detection, return routability authentication, support 
for talking to another peer behind the same NAT. We understand TURN would be 
further improve the situation but it seems unreasonable to implement a 
specification that keeps changing incompatibly every 4 months.

-- 
Rémi Denis-Courmont
Maemo Software, Nokia Devices R&D