Re: [BEHAVE] [rtcweb] Why? Quality! New Version Notification for draft-chenxin-behave-turn-websocket-00.txt

Le 2013-05-24 12:19, Matthew Kaufman (SKYPE) a écrit :
> (Channeling Randy Bush for a moment)... I strongly encourage my competitors to not engage in this battle.

It's not about engaging or not, it's about standardizing.

In an arms race, there no point to standardizing your weapons du jour.

As a framework, ICE still allows whatever form of firewall traversal 
that vendors may think of.

Simon

> On May 22, 2013, at 9:00 AM, "Simon Perreault" <simon.perreault@viagenie.ca> wrote:
>
>> Le 2013-05-22 01:02, Karl Stahl a écrit :
>>> Doesn’t the network administrator that configured the firewall have
>>> a legitimate right to decide what traffic should be on his network?
>>
>> IMHO this is the strongest argument.
>>
>> STUN/TURN/ICE have always been about NAT traversal. Firewall traversal
>> is a completely different beast. It implies a kind of battle between the
>> client and the firewall, where the client implementer is trying to be
>> smarter than the firewall administrator. This is a battle the IETF
>> should not engage in. Let the vendors play that game.
>>
>> Simon
>> _______________________________________________
>> rtcweb mailing list
>> rtcweb@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb
>>
>