Re: [MMUSIC] Comments on ICE-TCP specification RFC 6544

[Nigel Pattinson <[e-mail]>]

Adam Roach-3 wrote
> How many techniques from sections 5.3 and 5.4 did you implement? Did 
> your implementation make use of the following advice?
> 
>     If the local network or host
>     does not support IPv6 addressing,  clients SHOULD make use of
>     other techniques, e.g., TURN-IPv6 [RFC6156], Teredo [RFC4380], or
>     SOCKS IPv4-IPv6 gatewaying [RFC3089], for obtaining IPv6 candidates.
> 
> 
> My experience is that Teredo-to-Teredo tunneling has success rates well 
> above 50% (at least for RFC6081 implementations) -- although this is 
> admittedly from my own personal use of Teredo, and is far from a 
> scientific survey.

To be clear my comments about success rates are largely speculation at the
moment. We do set up host candidates for Teredo where available. My
understanding of Teredo is limited, I was thinking that when a
Teredo-to-Teredo connection was established the traffic would still be
relayed, just via a Teredo relay rather than a TURN relay.

Nigel



--
View this message in context: http://ietf.10.n7.nabble.com/Comments-on-ICE-TCP-specification-RFC-6544-tp191890p374584.html
Sent from the IETF - mmusic mailing list archive at Nabble.com.