Re: [MMUSIC] AD Evaluation of draft-ietf-mmusic-rfc4566bis-32: Local addresses

[Ben Campbell <[e-mail]>]

> On Feb 20, 2019, at 1:10 PM, Paul Kyzivat <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> Ben,
> 
> On 2/11/19 10:45 PM, Ben Campbell wrote:
> ...
>> §5.2: "Unless an SDP extension for NAT traversal is used
>> (e.g., ICE [RFC8445], ICE TCP [RFC6544]), a local IP address MUST
>> NOT be used in any context where the SDP description might leave
>> the scope in which the address is meaningful”
>> That doesn’t apply to just any NAT traversal extension does it? It seems to require extensions that have scope-resolution properties similar to those of ICE.
> 
> When I came back to this I realized it is talking about an address in an o= line, not c=. Hence there is no intent that anybody connect to this, and ICE doesn't apply here. The address is primarily here to add to the uniqueness of the o= line. And note that the <sess-id> is required to make up any lack of uniqueness in the combination of the other fields. And privacy is leading to people not wanting to put real addresses or names in here.
> 
> I suggest we trim this back to:
> 
>   <unicast-address>  is an address of the machine from which the
>      session was created.  For an address type of IP4, this is either a
>      fully qualified domain name of the machine or the dotted-decimal
>      representation of an IP version 4 address of the machine.  For an
>      address type of IP6, this is either a fully qualified domain name
>      of the machine or the compressed textual representation of an IP
>      version 6 address of the machine.  For both IP4 and IP6, the fully
>      qualified domain name is the form that SHOULD be given unless this
>      is unavailable, in which case a globally unique address MAY be
>      substituted.
> 
> And perhaps we should recommend that something bogus may be used to preserve some privacy.
> 
> I would like some feedback here!

Works for me.

Thanks!

Ben.