[AVTCORE] Comment on
"Cullen Jennings (fluffy)" <fluffy@cisco.com> Sat, 20 December 2014 20:14 UTC
Return-Path: <fluffy@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: avt@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: avt@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3FB671A9022 for <avt@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 20 Dec 2014 12:14:27 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -114.511
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-114.511 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id u3Trglpfnvlo for <avt@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 20 Dec 2014 12:14:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com [173.37.86.80]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 86D5B1A902F for <avt@ietf.org>; Sat, 20 Dec 2014 12:14:20 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=753; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1419106461; x=1420316061; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:content-id: content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=fJOVEX0j2uCbRChWIcOEnn63Jj8kNohVRQ9xjojfkh8=; b=L4oFYrHot/zlqsNhr4sVFUfPoGAE4PkPNjwSiT1zY3rOk2tVjy7WksbS Cq3QzakYFd92H1M8yGH5cIuvHAxyo3JRvyzoP2h3vK+nAdUc+zgOCZ8Jz p5TYZUwzKPtWaU1FV5qJ0ieD7NA0Ldlx6dkmYdawG39kCH0b+gwoaSRzh w=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgsFAGvXlVStJV2R/2dsb2JhbABbgmQigS7NLRYBAQEBAX2EEzpRAT5CJwSIPwGqQKUEAQEBAQYBAQEBAQEBG5MPgRMFjhGIcoENgmSNWiKDboI0fgEBAQ
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.07,614,1413244800"; d="scan'208";a="378515750"
Received: from rcdn-core-9.cisco.com ([173.37.93.145]) by rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com with ESMTP; 20 Dec 2014 20:14:20 +0000
Received: from xhc-rcd-x14.cisco.com (xhc-rcd-x14.cisco.com [173.37.183.88]) by rcdn-core-9.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id sBKKEJr0011129 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL) for <avt@ietf.org>; Sat, 20 Dec 2014 20:14:19 GMT
Received: from xmb-aln-x02.cisco.com ([fe80::8c1c:7b85:56de:ffd1]) by xhc-rcd-x14.cisco.com ([173.37.183.88]) with mapi id 14.03.0195.001; Sat, 20 Dec 2014 14:14:19 -0600
From: "Cullen Jennings (fluffy)" <fluffy@cisco.com>
To: "avt@ietf.org" <avt@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: Comment on
Thread-Index: AQHQHJGJoXr5KZ6AIk2cEftzZ2GYGg==
Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2014 20:14:18 +0000
Message-ID: <58F300B9-27C6-499E-8343-1F79FED0FBB9@cisco.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.20.249.164]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <46369C06833D314095609EA934453E35@emea.cisco.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/avt/0WVrCMb6NZIc16saj-s1_NU_8-k
Subject: [AVTCORE] Comment on
X-BeenThere: avt@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Audio/Video Transport Core Maintenance <avt.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/avt>, <mailto:avt-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/avt/>
List-Post: <mailto:avt@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:avt-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/avt>, <mailto:avt-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2014 20:14:28 -0000
The current draft has There are only a few STUN method codepoints currently allocated, but this is largely attributed to the fact that STUN did not see much deployment until the development of WebRTC. This is just plain wrong. There is a huge amount of implementation and deployment of STUN. This type of statement causes us problem when we are trying to get others to actually use our protocols. Please remove this very soon from the draft. Thanks PS - I think this draft gets one thing really wrong. The point of an IANA registry is we would not need to decide how many code points were allocated for STUN and how many for DTLS. Instead as they needed them they could get them from the registry.
- [AVTCORE] Comment on Cullen Jennings (fluffy)
- [AVTCORE] Comment on draft-petithuguenin-avtcore-… Cullen Jennings (fluffy)