Diameter Network Address and Port Translation Control Application
RFC 6736

Revision differences

Document history

Date Rev. By Action
2015-10-14
17 (System) Notify list changed from dime-chairs@ietf.org, draft-ietf-dime-nat-control@ietf.org to (None)
2012-10-26
17 (System) RFC published
2012-08-22
17 (System) post-migration administrative database adjustment to the No Objection position for Sean Turner
2012-08-22
17 (System) post-migration administrative database adjustment to the No Objection position for Ralph Droms
2012-08-22
17 (System) post-migration administrative database adjustment to the No Objection position for Stephen Farrell
2012-08-22
17 (System) post-migration administrative database adjustment to the No Objection position for Wesley Eddy
2012-06-11
17 (System) IANA Action state changed to RFC-Ed-Ack from Waiting on RFC Editor
2012-06-11
17 (System) IANA Action state changed to Waiting on RFC Editor from In Progress
2012-06-11
17 (System) IANA Action state changed to In Progress from Waiting on Authors
2012-05-21
17 (System) IANA Action state changed to Waiting on Authors from In Progress
2012-05-09
17 Benoît Claise Ballot writeup was changed
2012-05-08
17 (System) IANA Action state changed to In Progress
2012-05-08
17 Amy Vezza State changed to RFC Ed Queue from Approved-announcement sent
2012-05-08
17 Benoît Claise Ballot writeup was changed
2012-05-08
17 Benoît Claise Ballot writeup was changed
2012-05-08
17 Benoît Claise Ballot writeup was changed
2012-05-07
17 Amy Vezza State changed to Approved-announcement sent from Approved-announcement to be sent
2012-05-07
17 Amy Vezza IESG has approved the document
2012-05-07
17 Amy Vezza Closed "Approve" ballot
2012-05-07
17 Amy Vezza Ballot approval text was generated
2012-05-07
17 Amy Vezza Ballot writeup was changed
2012-05-07
17 Benoît Claise State changed to Approved-announcement to be sent from IESG Evaluation::AD Followup
2012-04-24
17 Martin Stiemerling [Ballot comment]
All of my comments are addressed.

Thanks!
2012-04-24
17 Martin Stiemerling [Ballot Position Update] Position for Martin Stiemerling has been changed to No Objection from Discuss
2012-04-23
17 Martin Stiemerling
[Ballot discuss]
Referring to version -17 of the draft

Most of my points have been addressed, but I could not find the text part below ...
2012-04-23
17 Martin Stiemerling Ballot discuss text updated for Martin Stiemerling
2012-04-23
17 Martin Stiemerling
[Ballot discuss]
Referring to version -17 of the draft

Most of my points have been addressed, but I could find the text part below in ...
2012-04-23
17 Martin Stiemerling Ballot discuss text updated for Martin Stiemerling
2012-04-22
17 Cisco Systems New version available: draft-ietf-dime-nat-control-17.txt
2012-04-22
16 Cisco Systems New version available: draft-ietf-dime-nat-control-16.txt
2012-03-29
15 Benoît Claise Responsible AD changed to Benoit Claise from Dan Romascanu
2012-03-29
15 Martin Stiemerling
[Ballot discuss]
Referring to version -15 of the draft

The below has been discussed with the authors and I'm waiting for an update of the ...
2012-03-29
15 Martin Stiemerling [Ballot Position Update] New position, Discuss, has been recorded for Martin Stiemerling
2012-03-29
15 Benoît Claise [Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded for Benoit Claise
2012-03-27
15 David Harrington
[Ballot discuss]
PARTIALLY updated for -15-

I think this proposal as written would have a negative effect on network operations and network security.

I have ...
2012-03-27
15 David Harrington Ballot discuss text updated for David Harrington
2012-03-27
15 David Harrington
[Ballot discuss]
updated for -13-

I think this proposal as written would have a negative effect on network operations and network security.

I have updated ...
2012-03-27
15 David Harrington [Ballot comment]
Additional editorial comments from Dave Thaler should be addressed. See http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/um/people/dthaler/draft-ietf-dime-nat-control-09.pdf

Additional editorial comments from the tsv-dir review should be addressed. http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dime/current/msg04789.html
2012-03-27
15 David Harrington Ballot comment and discuss text updated for David Harrington
2012-03-26
15 Frank Brockners New version available: draft-ietf-dime-nat-control-15.txt
2012-03-10
14 Cisco Systems New version available: draft-ietf-dime-nat-control-14.txt
2012-03-07
13 David Harrington
[Ballot discuss]
updated for -13-

I think this proposal as written would have a negative effect on network operations and network security.

I have updated ...
2012-03-07
13 David Harrington
[Ballot comment]
The change log is missing info on the changes between -10- and -12-

Additional editorial comments from Dave Thaler should be addressed. See ...
2012-03-07
13 David Harrington Ballot comment and discuss text updated for David Harrington
2012-01-10
13 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-dime-nat-control-13.txt
2011-10-25
12 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-dime-nat-control-12.txt
2011-10-20
13 Ralph Droms [Ballot Position Update] Position for Ralph Droms has been changed to No Objection from Discuss
2011-09-07
13 Robert Sparks [Ballot Position Update] Position for Robert Sparks has been changed to No Objection from Discuss
2011-09-06
13 Sean Turner [Ballot Position Update] Position for Sean Turner has been changed to No Objection from Discuss
2011-09-02
13 Stephen Farrell [Ballot comment]
I agree with Sean's discuss.
2011-09-02
13 Stephen Farrell [Ballot Position Update] Position for Stephen Farrell has been changed to No Objection from Discuss
2011-09-02
11 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-dime-nat-control-11.txt
2011-09-02
13 Stephen Farrell
[Ballot comment]
(1) Possibly dumb question: Why does this assume that all external
addresses are IPv4?

(2) I agree with Sean's discuss.

--- stuff below ...
2011-09-02
13 Stephen Farrell
[Ballot discuss]
(1) Why is the on-demand query feature required? (Section 1, bullet 5.)
This seems to be something that might have significant privacy
implications ...
2011-09-02
13 (System) Sub state has been changed to AD Follow up from New Id Needed
2011-09-02
10 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-dime-nat-control-10.txt
2011-08-05
13 David Harrington
[Ballot comment]
18) In 1, It would be good to state in the introduction that this includes NAT64 devices too. And is this only for ...
2011-08-05
13 David Harrington
[Ballot discuss]
I understand why a AAA approach to provisioning NATs would appear to be desirable, especially to service providers, but I think this proposal ...
2011-08-05
13 David Harrington
A review of this draft by the behave WG chairs has been done. Dave Thaler's comments are below:

http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/um/people/dthaler/draft-ietf-dime-nat-control-09.pdf

or (same content)

http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/um/people/dthaler/draft-ietf-dime-nat-control-09.docx

High level ...
2011-08-03
13 David Harrington Assignment of request for Last Call review by TSVDIR to Spencer Shepler was rejected
2011-08-03
13 David Harrington Request for Last Call review by TSVDIR Completed. Reviewer: Martin Stiemerling.
2011-07-15
13 David Harrington
[Ballot discuss]
I understand why a AAA approach to provisioning NATs would appear to be desirable, especially to service providers, but I think this proposal ...
2011-07-15
13 David Harrington [Ballot Position Update] New position, Discuss, has been recorded
2011-07-14
13 Cindy Morgan Removed from agenda for telechat
2011-07-14
13 Cindy Morgan State changed to IESG Evaluation::Revised ID Needed from IESG Evaluation.
2011-07-14
13 Jari Arkko
[Ballot comment]
I do not understand IPv6 on figures 3 and 4. Are they trying to show
dual-stack operation? If so, why is there only ...
2011-07-14
13 Jari Arkko [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded
2011-07-14
13 Adrian Farrel [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded
2011-07-14
13 Stephen Farrell [Ballot comment]
(1) Possibly dumb question: Why does this assume that all external
addresses are IPv4?

(2) I agree with Sean's discuss.
2011-07-14
13 Stephen Farrell
[Ballot discuss]
(1) Why is the on-demand query feature required? (Section 1, bullet 5.)
This seems to be something that might have significant privacy
implications ...
2011-07-14
13 Stephen Farrell [Ballot Position Update] Position for Stephen Farrell has been changed to Discuss from No Objection
2011-07-13
13 Gonzalo Camarillo [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded
2011-07-13
13 Sean Turner
[Ballot discuss]
This might be somewhat related to Robert's discuss:

According to the security considerations authentication, authorization, integrity, and confidentiality is demanded.  Does this require ...
2011-07-13
13 Sean Turner [Ballot Position Update] New position, Discuss, has been recorded
2011-07-13
13 Ron Bonica [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded
2011-07-13
13 Stephen Farrell [Ballot comment]
Oops - posted the discuss on the other dime I-D here, Will review this
one shortly. Sorry 'bout that.
2011-07-13
13 Stephen Farrell [Ballot discuss]
Oops - posted this on the wrong I-D. I've still to read this one.
2011-07-13
13 Stephen Farrell [Ballot Position Update] Position for Stephen Farrell has been changed to No Objection from Discuss
2011-07-13
13 Stephen Farrell
[Ballot discuss]
(1) I'm not sure that the Key-Type AVP is well enough specified.  At least
for the RSA-KEM variant, I would have expected to ...
2011-07-13
13 Stephen Farrell [Ballot Position Update] New position, Discuss, has been recorded
2011-07-13
13 Ralph Droms
[Ballot discuss]
This DISCUSS asks about process and can be quickly resolved.

Has this document been reviewed by the Transport Area; e.g., behave Working Group ...
2011-07-13
13 Ralph Droms [Ballot Position Update] New position, Discuss, has been recorded
2011-07-12
13 Peter Saint-Andre [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded
2011-07-12
13 Russ Housley [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded
2011-07-12
13 Robert Sparks [Ballot comment]
I'm surprised there is no discussion of how this relates to midcom and other nat control proposals.
2011-07-12
13 Robert Sparks
[Ballot discuss]
The deployment framework section strongly implies that there will be a single entity acting as the NAT controller. The introduction implies other deployment ...
2011-07-12
13 Robert Sparks [Ballot Position Update] New position, Discuss, has been recorded
2011-07-12
13 Stewart Bryant [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded
2011-07-11
13 Wesley Eddy [Ballot comment]
my DISCUSS comments have been very well-addressed in the update, and I've cleared them
2011-07-11
13 Wesley Eddy [Ballot Position Update] Position for Wesley Eddy has been changed to No Objection from Discuss
2011-07-10
09 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-dime-nat-control-09.txt
2011-07-10
13 Pete Resnick [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded
2011-07-09
13 Samuel Weiler Request for Telechat review by SECDIR is assigned to Matt Lepinski
2011-07-09
13 Samuel Weiler Request for Telechat review by SECDIR is assigned to Matt Lepinski
2011-07-07
13 Wesley Eddy [Ballot comment]
In the abstract, "completion" should be "depletion"
2011-07-07
13 Wesley Eddy
[Ballot discuss]
Why does the number of NAT bindings even need to be controlled?  Why should an ISP have any say in the matter?  This ...
2011-07-07
13 Wesley Eddy [Ballot Position Update] New position, Discuss, has been recorded
2011-07-06
13 Dan Romascanu [Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded for Dan Romascanu
2011-07-06
13 Dan Romascanu Ballot has been issued
2011-07-06
13 Dan Romascanu Created "Approve" ballot
2011-07-06
13 Dan Romascanu Placed on agenda for telechat - 2011-07-14
2011-07-06
13 Dan Romascanu State changed to IESG Evaluation from Waiting for AD Go-Ahead::AD Followup.
2011-06-30
13 (System) Sub state has been changed to AD Follow up from New Id Needed
2011-06-30
08 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-dime-nat-control-08.txt
2011-06-15
13 Jouni Korhonen Submitted to IESG a while ago.
2011-06-15
13 Jouni Korhonen IETF state changed to Submitted to IESG for Publication from WG Document
2011-04-21
13 Wesley Eddy Request for Last Call review by TSVDIR is assigned to Martin Stiemerling
2011-04-21
13 Wesley Eddy Request for Last Call review by TSVDIR is assigned to Martin Stiemerling
2011-03-28
13 David Harrington Request for Last Call review by TSVDIR is assigned to Spencer Shepler
2011-03-28
13 David Harrington Request for Last Call review by TSVDIR is assigned to Spencer Shepler
2011-03-28
13 David Harrington Assignment of request for Last Call review by TSVDIR to Bernard Aboba was rejected
2011-03-11
13 Samuel Weiler Request for Last Call review by SECDIR Completed. Reviewer: Matt Lepinski.
2011-03-08
13 Dan Romascanu State changed to Waiting for AD Go-Ahead::Revised ID Needed from Waiting for AD Go-Ahead.
2011-03-08
13 (System) State changed to Waiting for AD Go-Ahead from In Last Call.
2011-03-07
13 Amanda Baber
IANA understands that, upon approval of this document, there are five
IANA Actions that need to be completed.

First, in the command code subregistry of ...
2011-02-26
13 Samuel Weiler Request for Last Call review by SECDIR is assigned to Matt Lepinski
2011-02-26
13 Samuel Weiler Request for Last Call review by SECDIR is assigned to Matt Lepinski
2011-02-24
13 David Harrington Request for Last Call review by TSVDIR is assigned to Bernard Aboba
2011-02-24
13 David Harrington Request for Last Call review by TSVDIR is assigned to Bernard Aboba
2011-02-22
13 Amy Vezza Last call sent
2011-02-22
13 Amy Vezza
State changed to In Last Call from Last Call Requested.

The following Last Call Announcement was sent out:

From: The IESG <iesg-secretary@ietf.org>
To: IETF-Announce <ietf-announce@ietf.org> ...
2011-02-22
13 Dan Romascanu Last Call was requested
2011-02-22
13 Dan Romascanu State changed to Last Call Requested from AD Evaluation::AD Followup.
2011-02-22
13 Dan Romascanu Last Call text changed
2011-02-22
13 (System) Ballot writeup text was added
2011-02-22
13 (System) Last call text was added
2011-02-16
13 (System) Sub state has been changed to AD Follow up from New Id Needed
2011-02-16
07 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-dime-nat-control-07.txt
2011-01-25
13 Dan Romascanu State changed to AD Evaluation::Revised ID Needed from AD Evaluation.
2011-01-24
13 Dan Romascanu State changed to AD Evaluation from Publication Requested.
2011-01-13
13 Cindy Morgan
  (1.a) Who is the Document Shepherd for this document? Has the
        Document Shepherd personally reviewed this version of the
  ...
2011-01-13
13 Cindy Morgan Draft Added by Cindy Morgan in state Publication Requested
2011-01-13
13 Cindy Morgan [Note]: 'Jouni Korhonen (jouni.korhonen@nsn.com, jouni.nospam@gmail.com) is the Document Shepherd.' added by Cindy Morgan
2011-01-10
06 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-dime-nat-control-06.txt
2010-10-22
05 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-dime-nat-control-05.txt
2010-10-16
04 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-dime-nat-control-04.txt
2010-07-12
03 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-dime-nat-control-03.txt
2010-03-08
02 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-dime-nat-control-02.txt
2009-10-26
01 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-dime-nat-control-01.txt
2009-08-27
00 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-dime-nat-control-00.txt