Re: [BEHAVE] [rtcweb] URI schemes for TURN and STUN
Marc Petit-Huguenin <petithug@acm.org> Sun, 06 November 2011 17:19 UTC
Return-Path: <petithug@acm.org>
X-Original-To: behave@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: behave@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D73AE21F853E; Sun, 6 Nov 2011 09:19:01 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.65
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.65 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.050, BAYES_00=-2.599, NO_RELAYS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id LAjhZSce9ixm; Sun, 6 Nov 2011 09:19:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: from implementers.org (implementers.org [IPv6:2604:3400:dc1:41:216:3eff:fe5b:8240]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D236C21F8532; Sun, 6 Nov 2011 09:19:00 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [IPv6:2001:470:1f05:616:213:d4ff:fe04:3e08] (shalmaneser.org [IPv6:2001:470:1f05:616:213:d4ff:fe04:3e08]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "petithug", Issuer "implementers.org" (verified OK)) by implementers.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2876820138; Sun, 6 Nov 2011 17:09:50 +0000 (UTC)
Message-ID: <4EB6C17F.50103@acm.org>
Date: Sun, 06 Nov 2011 09:18:55 -0800
From: Marc Petit-Huguenin <petithug@acm.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.23) Gecko/20111010 Iceowl/1.0b2 Icedove/3.1.15
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Ned Freed <ned.freed@mrochek.com>
References: <4EAC6BF4.2000604@alvestrand.no> <CALiegf=f4kFzyDLWK+Y5vbuCEJFXX590+VuZ4bbnHZnvX0CoBA@mail.gmail.com> <4EAC8AE0.3020307@acm.org> <4EACD558.1050003@alvestrand.no> <4EAE157F.5020901@it.aoyama.ac.jp> <4EAEB76B.9090304@acm.org> <8B0C4061-D362-4DFE-9677-7E64515A6E1C@network-heretics.com> <4EAF9391.5040209@it.aoyama.ac.jp> <4EB05A23.3060101@alvestrand.no> <01O80L7NM7N000RCTX@mauve.mrochek.com> <CABcZeBPCGcUcEDNJ5T3+LowrdTz-NAka3Q33CA8mvdwb0=+aZg@mail.gmail.com> <4EB480E7.1010200@alvestrand.no> <CABcZeBPba+PU5234jpHRYa0sfiwKVVFg6C-oGXBUEehvjrmpmw@mail.gmail.com> <48690B43-422C-4B65-8A70-B01F01F8FD97@cisco.com> <4EB552F0.6050800@acm.org> <4EB6B7F0.4040001@alvestrand.no> <01O83GWH5W5I00XBUL@mauve.mrochek.com>
In-Reply-To: <01O83GWH5W5I00XBUL@mauve.mrochek.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.1.2
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>, Behave WG <behave@ietf.org>, Keith Moore <moore@network-heretics.com>, Gonzalo Salgueiro <gsalguei@cisco.com>, Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>, Keith Moore <moore@cs.utk.edu>, rtcweb@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [BEHAVE] [rtcweb] URI schemes for TURN and STUN
X-BeenThere: behave@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: mailing list of BEHAVE IETF WG <behave.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/behave>, <mailto:behave-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/behave>
List-Post: <mailto:behave@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:behave-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/behave>, <mailto:behave-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 06 Nov 2011 17:19:02 -0000
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 11/06/2011 09:59 AM, Ned Freed wrote: >> On 11/05/2011 04:14 PM, Marc Petit-Huguenin wrote: >> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >> > Hash: SHA1 >> > >> > On 11/05/2011 08:04 AM, Gonzalo Salgueiro wrote: >> >> On Nov 5, 2011, at 10:30 AM, Eric Rescorla wrote: >> >> >> >>> On Fri, Nov 4, 2011 at 5:18 PM, Harald Alvestrand<harald@alvestrand.no >> >>> <mailto:harald@alvestrand.no>> wrote: >> >>>> On 11/04/2011 04:56 PM, Eric Rescorla wrote: >> >>>>> I don't have any commitment to the scheme. What's the best place? >> >>>> I like parameters, like this: >> >>>> >> >>>> turn://user@host?proto=tcp >> >>>> >> >>>> Quite hard to misunderstand, and quite easy to extend. >> >>>> >> >>>> (Note: // is only allowed if what follows is [user[:pass]@]host - I don't >> >>>> recommend using the password, for the obvious reasons, but the syntax will >> >>>> allow it.) >> >>> I don't see any security problem with that. The "break old >> >>> implementations" rationale >> >>> doesn't apply when we are defining a new URI scheme. >> >> I agree with this as well. If we can get some consensus with this, I will >> >> update the next version of both the STUN and TURN URI Scheme drafts to include >> >> this format. >> > Or you can look at draft-petithuguenin-behave-turn-uri-bis, which is already >> > doing it right (and had a lot of reviews back in 2008, before I split the >> > resolution mechanism and the syntax in two separate documents). >> > >> > I know my email address does not contain the magical "cisco.com", but this is >> > getting ridiculous. > >> Second opinion: draft-petithuguenin uses TURN and TURNS as scheme names. >> I still think this is doing it wrong. > > I concur, especially since two different security layers could be used for some > transports in addition to none at all. The security layer needs to be specified > as a parameter. The current syntax was inspired by RFC 3261, but I can put some text about different syntax in the spec for the purpose of the discussion[1]. What parameter name would you propose for that? [1] Note that my point of view, and IMO the first thing that should be discussed, is that a TURN URI is not needed for what RTCWEB wants to do. Why is it better to have a URI (on which we cannot put the password anyway), versus having multiple individual string characters for the security level, transport, host, port, login and password? - -- Marc Petit-Huguenin Personal email: marc@petit-huguenin.org Professional email: petithug@acm.org Blog: http://blog.marc.petit-huguenin.org -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAk62wX0ACgkQ9RoMZyVa61cWSgCgnHXs8DWr5BKn1jB9j3+cz5Bf +68AoI0Uk3+TKbcV5OSlG/zRZD6AIXrg =tqtp -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
- Re: [BEHAVE] [rtcweb] URI schemes for TURN and ST… Marc Petit-Huguenin
- Re: [BEHAVE] [rtcweb] URI schemes for TURN and ST… Keith Moore
- Re: [BEHAVE] [rtcweb] URI schemes for TURN and ST… Marc Petit-Huguenin
- Re: [BEHAVE] [rtcweb] URI schemes for TURN and ST… Keith Moore
- Re: [BEHAVE] [rtcweb] URI schemes for TURN and ST… Harald Alvestrand
- Re: [BEHAVE] [rtcweb] URI schemes for TURN and ST… Iñaki Baz Castillo
- Re: [BEHAVE] [rtcweb] URI schemes for TURN and ST… Harald Alvestrand
- Re: [BEHAVE] [rtcweb] URI schemes for TURN and ST… Eric Rescorla
- Re: [BEHAVE] [rtcweb] URI schemes for TURN and ST… Iñaki Baz Castillo
- Re: [BEHAVE] [rtcweb] URI schemes for TURN and ST… Marc Petit-Huguenin
- Re: [BEHAVE] [rtcweb] URI schemes for TURN and ST… Keith Moore
- Re: [BEHAVE] [rtcweb] URI schemes for TURN and ST… Martin J. Dürst
- Re: [BEHAVE] [rtcweb] URI schemes for TURN and ST… Keith Moore
- Re: [BEHAVE] [rtcweb] URI schemes for TURN and ST… Martin J. Dürst
- Re: [BEHAVE] [rtcweb] URI schemes for TURN and ST… Marc Petit-Huguenin
- Re: [BEHAVE] [rtcweb] URI schemes for TURN and ST… Harald Alvestrand
- Re: [BEHAVE] [rtcweb] URI schemes for TURN and ST… Keith Moore
- Re: [BEHAVE] [rtcweb] URI schemes for TURN and ST… Keith Moore
- Re: [BEHAVE] [rtcweb] URI schemes for TURN and ST… Eric Rescorla
- Re: [BEHAVE] [rtcweb] URI schemes for TURN and ST… Eric Rescorla
- Re: [BEHAVE] [rtcweb] URI schemes for TURN and ST… Eric Rescorla
- Re: [BEHAVE] [rtcweb] URI schemes for TURN and ST… Eric Rescorla
- Re: [BEHAVE] [rtcweb] URI schemes for TURN and ST… Ned Freed
- Re: [BEHAVE] [rtcweb] URI schemes for TURN and ST… Dan Wing
- Re: [BEHAVE] [rtcweb] URI schemes for TURN and ST… Marc Petit-Huguenin
- Re: [BEHAVE] [rtcweb] URI schemes for TURN and ST… Dan Wing
- Re: [BEHAVE] [rtcweb] URI schemes for TURN and ST… Eric Rescorla
- Re: [BEHAVE] [rtcweb] URI schemes for TURN and ST… Marc Petit-Huguenin
- Re: [BEHAVE] [rtcweb] URI schemes for TURN and ST… Dan Wing
- Re: [BEHAVE] [rtcweb] URI schemes for TURN and ST… Harald Alvestrand
- Re: [BEHAVE] [rtcweb] URI schemes for TURN and ST… Eric Rescorla
- Re: [BEHAVE] [rtcweb] URI schemes for TURN and ST… Gonzalo Salgueiro
- Re: [BEHAVE] [rtcweb] URI schemes for TURN and ST… Marc Petit-Huguenin
- Re: [BEHAVE] [rtcweb] URI schemes for TURN and ST… Gonzalo Salgueiro
- Re: [BEHAVE] [rtcweb] URI schemes for TURN and ST… Marc Petit-Huguenin
- Re: [BEHAVE] [rtcweb] URI schemes for TURN and ST… Ned Freed
- Re: [BEHAVE] [rtcweb] URI schemes for TURN and ST… Eric Rescorla
- Re: [BEHAVE] [rtcweb] URI schemes for TURN and ST… Harald Alvestrand
- Re: [BEHAVE] [rtcweb] URI schemes for TURN and ST… Harald Alvestrand
- Re: [BEHAVE] [rtcweb] URI schemes for TURN and ST… Harald Alvestrand
- Re: [BEHAVE] [rtcweb] URI schemes for TURN and ST… Marc Petit-Huguenin
- Re: [BEHAVE] [rtcweb] URI schemes for TURN and ST… Marc Petit-Huguenin
- Re: [BEHAVE] [rtcweb] URI schemes for TURN and ST… Gonzalo Salgueiro
- Re: [BEHAVE] [rtcweb] URI schemes for TURN and ST… Ned Freed
- Re: [BEHAVE] [rtcweb] URI schemes for TURN and ST… Tina TSOU
- Re: [BEHAVE] [rtcweb] URI schemes for TURN and ST… Iñaki Baz Castillo