Re: [MMUSIC] (Rough) Consensus Call - No FQDN support in ice-sip-sdp

Roman Shpount <roman@telurix.com> Mon, 20 May 2019 21:23 UTC

Return-Path: <roman@telurix.com>
X-Original-To: mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB8DC1200F5 for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 20 May 2019 14:23:08 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.09
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.09 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_BOUND_DIGITS_15=0.798, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, T_SPF_PERMERROR=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=telurix-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com
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 sV2rkWJi09Uw for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 20 May 2019 14:23:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pg1-x535.google.com (mail-pg1-x535.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::535]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0759F120048 for <mmusic@ietf.org>; Mon, 20 May 2019 14:23:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pg1-x535.google.com with SMTP id a3so7390037pgb.3 for <mmusic@ietf.org>; Mon, 20 May 2019 14:23:06 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=telurix-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=vdy7j5ZtU2NFCNDDaacMlG5POOfZ4nCiZg6S+2ZBDZk=; b=uTAq/GN7n/pRUJrWy1vsguUXDnsyF1TIFgTfjS+uRjmGZrgYunBVJxoidlsVBIe44s oislff+o+v2jm/srRx180L/RYW0W9mruDAHe3VPZofUHa7P+a9y8cQ9FwcA7sOlsxlck PERjavZLtRVlKbV6J9oNNsNy53YKBzPF43tM4yNHYx+/h/HMi+ZY6w1At0jj7xo1C9p6 OwuLSeeoajzydFHCL9BPoaAF7hC8jhhlKbYVrMubHmKmvrnPEsppQTUFSmUqhyReRQvo 3Z0A/CY/mLUXx016c2LHsWhb3bFvoLhCbJ2SqBzZkKAnBlxNcnsoEBtKmDvZg7DEVXM8 ZkRg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=vdy7j5ZtU2NFCNDDaacMlG5POOfZ4nCiZg6S+2ZBDZk=; b=DP3l9unoiha/anexVH9c4kUGSXBEuqnhZ24Mo7T3X0asZ4Sp1AtXTBduPWfV8ZCPm4 34sHUe8NDfhyPnEjgWEcPXZeXtSlzu1VjAybqWEB0LOvvxFsnD2Z6uJEqH7Fsu867Hyi ZSMzFg9gcT8TFUkAGI3RlbNQ/kcNUzmi+7YHAdCu0DLmDFJKg5oIHb0kmBDN5VfS/uTp S9NhDUIjH4rprXV6444yk2rYlmCKW8heLImeaYN89lhjTEbo3g8KmMb/ymXFgJ5Fr6s6 DGQ0tkxJVhN706hSS6v6j7zoV49/LQK7iqF4yP+1BSrbVz5+zMvEbevLPo0VrBfyLc41 9Srg==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXuErVnaUdZcAzuqV5+KyU548jszybEVukAIqw8ICyA1tt205Jv 395dqOt5/xeQET8hwgjkPNr2zpyfPFM=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqy8WOip7Qrt7AZxdfwgwQlrw0fuQnUowZYwRWcPPXBIGSXzd7mju0byErXBFn6YCvsFeIwHpw==
X-Received: by 2002:a62:4351:: with SMTP id q78mr81470871pfa.86.1558387386208; Mon, 20 May 2019 14:23:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pf1-f181.google.com (mail-pf1-f181.google.com. [209.85.210.181]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id i17sm24093944pfo.103.2019.05.20.14.23.05 for <mmusic@ietf.org> (version=TLS1_3 cipher=AEAD-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 20 May 2019 14:23:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pf1-f181.google.com with SMTP id b76so7852907pfb.5 for <mmusic@ietf.org>; Mon, 20 May 2019 14:23:05 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a63:5443:: with SMTP id e3mr77061764pgm.265.1558387385261; Mon, 20 May 2019 14:23:05 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <77400318-1e2c-7d33-ab41-a3b8d0062b00@cisco.com> <CAMRcRGQ0gQ0c-pmBQ2ZOOX-5uGWkfy57Yu0QMuAp9ED2f8drwA@mail.gmail.com> <D7E2876E-E750-40C6-B33E-FC24F9CD0709@ericsson.com>
In-Reply-To: <D7E2876E-E750-40C6-B33E-FC24F9CD0709@ericsson.com>
From: Roman Shpount <roman@telurix.com>
Date: Mon, 20 May 2019 17:22:55 -0400
X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: <CAD5OKxtc=Pi-ghHEHdt8GJC7J3x8HWiHijrKu5ux_w6N+_iNFw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAD5OKxtc=Pi-ghHEHdt8GJC7J3x8HWiHijrKu5ux_w6N+_iNFw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>
Cc: Suhas Nandakumar <suhasietf@gmail.com>, Flemming Andreasen <fandreas@cisco.com>, mmusic <mmusic@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000008564810589585677"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mmusic/9lwWS7VLdqj2N01nCi9luWdNjlg>
Subject: Re: [MMUSIC] (Rough) Consensus Call - No FQDN support in ice-sip-sdp
X-BeenThere: mmusic@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multiparty Multimedia Session Control Working Group <mmusic.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/mmusic>, <mailto:mmusic-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/mmusic/>
List-Post: <mailto:mmusic@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mmusic-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic>, <mailto:mmusic-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 20 May 2019 21:23:09 -0000

Since there was little feedback on this discussion I would suggest to
specify that FQDN is supported and ignored. I have provided the language in
a separate email.
_____________
Roman Shpount


On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 5:49 AM Christer Holmberg <
christer.holmberg@ericsson.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
>
>
> I would have liked to see the Pull Request before concluding that there is
> no “agreement”. But, we can obviously not wait forever.
>
>
>
> Having said that, related to Suhas’ comment, if we agree to leave FQDN out
> I think we still need some text.
>
>
>
> One option is to put back the text pre-22 text (see below), but I am not
> sure that solves the issue. Another option is to explicitly say that
> support and processing of FQDNs are outside the scope of the document, and
> needs to be covered in a separate specification.
>
>
>
> Note, however, that draft-ietf-rtcweb-mdns-ice-candidates assumes that
> FQDNs are allowed, so in order to progress that draft we either need such
> separate specification – or draft-ietf-rtcweb-mdns-ice-candidates also
> needs to cover FQDN support in general.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
>
>
> Christer
>
>
>
> *From: *mmusic <mmusic-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of Suhas Nandakumar <
> suhasietf@gmail.com>
> *Date: *Monday, 13 May 2019 at 8.05
> *To: *Flemming Andreasen <fandreas@cisco.com>
> *Cc: *"mmusic@ietf.org" <mmusic@ietf.org>
> *Subject: *Re: [MMUSIC] (Rough) Consensus Call - No FQDN support in
> ice-sip-sdp
>
>
>
> I am willing to leave out FQDN specification but want to bring to notice
> the following
>
>
>
> Till ice-sip-sdp-22 we had a recommendation about resolving to one IP
> Address when multiple match a given FQDN and removed FQDN out from the
> later versions.
>
>
>
> Here is the original text if it helps (pre-22)
>
>
>
>
>
> <connection-address>:  is taken from RFC 4566 [RFC4566].  It is the
>
>       IP address of the candidate.  When parsing this field, an agent
>
>       can differentiate an IPv4 address and an IPv6 address by presence
>
>       of a colon in its value -- the presence of a colon indicates IPv6.
>
>       An agent MUST ignore candidate lines that include candidates with
>
>       IP address versions that are not supported or recognized.  An IP
>
>       address SHOULD be used, but an FQDN MAY be used in place of an IP
>
>       address.  In that case, when receiving an offer or answer
>
>       containing an FQDN in an a=candidate attribute, the FQDN is looked
>
>       up in the DNS first using an AAAA record (assuming the agent
>
>       supports IPv6), and if no result is found or the agent only
>
>       supports IPv4, using an A record.  The rules from section 6 of
>
>       [RFC6724] is followed by fixing the source address to be one from
>
>       the candidate pair to be matched against destination addresses
>
>       reported by FQDN, in cases where the DNS query returns more than
>
>       one IP address.
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
> Suhas
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Sun, May 12, 2019 at 8:40 PM Flemming Andreasen <fandreas@cisco.com>
> wrote:
>
> Greetings
>
> RFC 8445 does not include support for domain names. There is currently a
> fairly lengthy thread on the MMUSIC list discussing if (and potentially
> how) to deal with domain name support in ice-sip-sdp ("FQDN support in
> ice-sip-sdp). So far only 3 people seem to be interested in this issue,
> they do not agree on the solution, and it has been more than 2 weeks since
> we last saw any traffic on this.
>
> We need to move ice-sip-sdp forward, and since RFC 8445 does not support
> domain names in candidates, and we have yet to find a consensus-based
> solution to adding such support, we propose that we move forward without
> domain name support in ice-sip-sdp (note that it can be added latter as an
> extension in a separate draft).
>
> We are hereby giving people 1 week to object to this (rough) consensus
> call, and if they do, to provide another solution that can garner support
> and consensus on the MMUSIC list.
>
> Thanks
>
> -- Flemmming (with MMUSIC chair on).
>
> _______________________________________________
> mmusic mailing list
> mmusic@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic
>
> _______________________________________________
> mmusic mailing list
> mmusic@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic
>