[Dart] Protocols and port numbers (Re: RTP and non-RTP traffic on same UDP 5-tuple)

Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no> Sun, 15 June 2014 08:33 UTC

Return-Path: <harald@alvestrand.no>
X-Original-To: dart@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dart@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A4D3E1B2BB5 for <dart@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 15 Jun 2014 01:33:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.551
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.551 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.651] 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 Zur2-ixGhXON for <dart@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 15 Jun 2014 01:33:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mork.alvestrand.no (mork.alvestrand.no [158.38.152.117]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B79E81A0324 for <dart@ietf.org>; Sun, 15 Jun 2014 01:33:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mork.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E2857C3793 for <dart@ietf.org>; Sun, 15 Jun 2014 10:33:24 +0200 (CEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at alvestrand.no
Received: from mork.alvestrand.no ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mork.alvestrand.no [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id A8Fij-wHxlM2 for <dart@ietf.org>; Sun, 15 Jun 2014 10:33:23 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [192.168.1.186] (unknown [188.113.88.47]) by mork.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id ABA0E7C378F for <dart@ietf.org>; Sun, 15 Jun 2014 10:33:23 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <539D5A53.3050801@alvestrand.no>
Date: Sun, 15 Jun 2014 10:33:23 +0200
From: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.5.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: dart@ietf.org
References: <8D3D17ACE214DC429325B2B98F3AE712076FD346C9@MX15A.corp.emc.com> <5398BF50.5040604@gmail.com> <657B1854-CC2F-4061-83BF-43447230ACC3@cisco.com> <539904B6.4050803@gmail.com> <CC45C7A8-2D7F-47D4-B4C8-8924930CF7B4@nostrum.com> <539A33C6.9080409@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <539A33C6.9080409@gmail.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dart/tgUjpmOm8YfSpgt5ZVjQUVwZtXo
Subject: [Dart] Protocols and port numbers (Re: RTP and non-RTP traffic on same UDP 5-tuple)
X-BeenThere: dart@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "\"DiffServ Applied to RTP Transports discussion list\"" <dart.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dart>, <mailto:dart-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dart/>
List-Post: <mailto:dart@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dart-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dart>, <mailto:dart-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 15 Jun 2014 08:33:27 -0000

On 06/13/2014 01:12 AM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
>
> Subject to David's comment about AF "colour" possibly being preserved, yes.
>
> There is another little point though. We've been discussing port numbers
> as though they are transport-independent. Actually, a classifier needs to
> look at the protocol number (TCP, UDP, SCTP, DCCP etc) before it knows
> for sure where the port numbers are. So debating this point before
> draft-ietf-rtcweb-transports-05 is rock solid may be a little academic.
> I don't think generic classifiers are set up for "SCTP over DTLS over ICE"
> for example.

As far as anything at all in RTCWEB is rock solid, the decision to use
UDP is rock solid.
So we can take that as a given for RTCWEB.

(apart from the case where one uses TCP because the firewalls don't
allow UDP...)

Generic classifiers will detect the traffic as UDP, and may be able to
tell RTP from DTLS-encapsulated data in the same way as the DTLS/RTP
demultiplexing does it.

-- 
Surveillance is pervasive. Go Dark.