IETF Logo Mail Archive

[AVTCORE] Comment on draft-petithuguenin-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes

"Cullen Jennings (fluffy)" <fluffy@cisco.com> Sat, 20 December 2014 21:52 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 080971A8035 for <avt@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 20 Dec 2014 13:52:41 -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 vdOLv8lLpiVU for <avt@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 20 Dec 2014 13:52:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rcdn-iport-1.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-1.cisco.com [173.37.86.72]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1A20F1A90A6 for <avt@ietf.org>; Sat, 20 Dec 2014 13:50:04 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1129; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1419112205; x=1420321805; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:references:in-reply-to: content-id:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=XDMjXSMQW4gWaQnaQ5BqLiff4zTqIFbrdqC8kmpxRSQ=; b=j+S3fcb8R+lIbwHy0YpCOyxgsNkPDMwlX/PiAqZh5AMHb+g+2Ioib1cS dSm4vh+9H3psMxellfv1HALnshwN/2WbIq4IYAB9Tcos0h0p9FxlJK/MP qYL7FWKOJ7TXqP4FWi0BAm49kB+Eci819jXGbpSgr731rrV9gly/HQ7/f U=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AicFAOztlVStJA2H/2dsb2JhbABbgmQiUlgExh8KhXACgREWAQEBAQF9hAwBAQEDAQEBATdECwIBIB4QJwslAgQTiCQIAQzPEAEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBARMEj3mDFoETBY4RiHKBDYJkjVoig25vgUV+AQEB
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.07,615,1413244800"; d="scan'208";a="378519733"
Received: from alln-core-2.cisco.com ([173.36.13.135]) by rcdn-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 20 Dec 2014 21:50:04 +0000
Received: from xhc-rcd-x11.cisco.com (xhc-rcd-x11.cisco.com [173.37.183.85]) by alln-core-2.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id sBKLo36q030351 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL) for <avt@ietf.org>; Sat, 20 Dec 2014 21:50:03 GMT
Received: from xmb-aln-x02.cisco.com ([fe80::8c1c:7b85:56de:ffd1]) by xhc-rcd-x11.cisco.com ([173.37.183.85]) with mapi id 14.03.0195.001; Sat, 20 Dec 2014 15:50:02 -0600
From: "Cullen Jennings (fluffy)" <fluffy@cisco.com>
To: "avt@ietf.org" <avt@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: Comment on draft-petithuguenin-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes
Thread-Index: AQHQHJ7owtHep1ZoR0inSyFeng+W6A==
Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2014 21:50:01 +0000
Message-ID: <9AFBE90D-E252-467D-9DE4-F8B1D1F85A68@cisco.com>
References: <58F300B9-27C6-499E-8343-1F79FED0FBB9@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <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: <B29D6A560AB9AD4883D33390DEC40859@emea.cisco.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/avt/schowVcCMTzvSjug5uvDliuc_nY
Subject: [AVTCORE] Comment on draft-petithuguenin-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes
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 21:52:41 -0000

My apologies - I mean the subject to include the correct daft name 


> On Dec 20, 2014, at 1:14 PM, Cullen Jennings (fluffy) <fluffy@cisco.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> 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. 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Audio/Video Transport Core Maintenance
> avt@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/avt
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email