Yes, with tunnel brokering and the ability to reverse-tunnel "Roaming"
'Internet users should be able find a way to communicate on their own
terms', as they move in a "Mobile Environment" switching back-end
networks if required, for Mobile VPN.
Kudos to Cisco's Mobile Access Router 3200 for being an example for
this architecture.
Yes, I had the pleasure of "piggyback" riding a WiFi network setup by a
neighbor while in a hotelroom in a remote, forsaken place and in the
words of Ole, 'as a consumer of paid-for Internet service (that works)',
there was no reason for me to care and probably these rules set for user
terms will need to be integrated for policy to switch to another network
if I really have to pay. Somebody is paying, but there really ain't no
free lunch!
Regards,
Harsh Verma
Director, R&D, GLOCOL, Inc
Past Vice-Chair (Industry) R&D WG, NECCC
Member, Cross Boundary WG
Tel: +1(916)684-3262
E-Mail: hverma(_at_)glocol(_dot_)net
www.glocol.net
-----Original Message-----
From: ietf-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
[mailto:ietf-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org] On Behalf Of
Mark Smith
Sent: Monday, June 21, 2004 5:39 AM
To: cdel(_at_)firsthand(_dot_)net
Cc: ole(_at_)cisco(_dot_)com; ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org;
hadmut(_at_)danisch(_dot_)de
Subject: Re: What exactly is an internet (service) provider?
On Mon, 21 Jun 2004 10:03:46 +0100
"Christian de Larrinaga" <cdel(_at_)firsthand(_dot_)net> wrote:
<snip>
A traveller cannot change ISP easily so either will just have to
accept some things cannot be done or will find a way. As it happens
one can preplan and setup a proxy service or a tunnel broker etc that
can get round many of these issues.
Perhaps the IETF would be wiser to give a warning about the futility
of trying to break application transparency. "The Internet user may
always find a way to communicate on their own terms"
... using the following tunnel broker / VPN peer. The neat thing about
it is that it uses SSL/TLS over UDP, and you can specify the UDP ports
to use. As it uses UDP to encapsulate the IP packets, the outer IP
header can be NATted.
Also, as it uses UDP, and the ports are selectable, you may be able to
"punch" a pipe through a firewall, by using UDP ports #53 a.k.a. DNS,
depending on how well the firewall inspects DNS traffic. If that works
out, "The Internet user may always find a way to communicate on their
own terms", irrespective of NAT.
http://openvpn.sourceforge.net/
Regards,
Mark.
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf