Re: [MMUSIC] Last chance to comment [Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-mmusic-ice-sip-sdp-27.txt] - Text on ICE PAC

Roman Shpount <roman@telurix.com> Mon, 20 May 2019 22:35 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 B18D41200EA for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 20 May 2019 15:35:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.888
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.888 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, T_SPF_PERMERROR=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham 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 YrtBr_nyhvYs for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 20 May 2019 15:34:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pg1-x52d.google.com (mail-pg1-x52d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::52d]) (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 50CE81200A2 for <mmusic@ietf.org>; Mon, 20 May 2019 15:34:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pg1-x52d.google.com with SMTP id w22so7459856pgi.6 for <mmusic@ietf.org>; Mon, 20 May 2019 15:34:59 -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=t9IlHFRVBCsasEr6QQBjo9jSsLcOXjOfXUl1bxGyxTA=; b=wXk9wFAywFStkBjR8JFSTc0kPUG8JihESS36JUfubjMIzZ3rbAq170yGyq34mtJ6iU IaylGb9XCfRmXN/fOPQ4cPKsXtnxMMEwP1jyGuZeSUmXXcxG9tiFG++iVIyHRfO6Y/OW kcv4Xy7M0IBvuFpnXsiq9bA1YJt8qn72TeBeDmmMfW/Tf7obG5T6m5h8TzvQEB/kqjpz kk7UrZHLf9/0R8iPR22wTb/KZgAtJH1wCR1RXzQda0fR1ydQ+9jYWJ7c+FK34MNoohEc I6z9o5h/ReEL8kXXPYh9IgrkHw8n433Dvc9/Z0dBvJHy0BxgPWiOsxDQGdUxmAd4lJYI h5Cw==
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=t9IlHFRVBCsasEr6QQBjo9jSsLcOXjOfXUl1bxGyxTA=; b=sZuI7vKQd8Bdhn7cDrh2/ul+QHstmqxI0Yf6UIzhk9M7369RBKsSLFrGs7mKc1QLw+ QQavhTC58Ou7XxoQsf92jIpgxE/ba6g0GZDf6UGrlinRP0QCN8/RkP9cM/rc4sUt5nVv nTdq+2UVRo/WXEJ3WiH3s2ZqDrGfCcc6McplHoMQWdTEHlggq5l99U/N/8OANzmaUwQy 8OTfW5S4PDUtzUm7UzTuCLaKIDfdv7a/XjAxEupUYr416cSEmns++wa138N8XFZVhku7 khOg9UIOiPOrsiqTEhJS6XSWBj8wgSOgb/0coH99D1tQ1eW4VFZKKTqesPrHLWv9EIcB ofXw==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAU/yzqZhMJxiKbtC2hNGB+jRMfwB8XNligkznupU4hIKtIjR91O ySLGn43BZ24e26jm7Z2M2uglx3OH9X8=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwKkMATgM+UXNRL9XOCmnfDs9fR5S86iwhffSQO36NllcQnfTvH0nxITX+ZoHgHSK6zFhA4KA==
X-Received: by 2002:a63:318b:: with SMTP id x133mr77759263pgx.297.1558391698646; Mon, 20 May 2019 15:34:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pl1-f177.google.com (mail-pl1-f177.google.com. [209.85.214.177]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id d88sm10920468pfm.42.2019.05.20.15.34.57 for <mmusic@ietf.org> (version=TLS1_3 cipher=AEAD-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 20 May 2019 15:34:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pl1-f177.google.com with SMTP id r18so7362330pls.13 for <mmusic@ietf.org>; Mon, 20 May 2019 15:34:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:bd94:: with SMTP id q20mr56083844pls.146.1558391697551; Mon, 20 May 2019 15:34:57 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <3D9B3546-3C27-42CF-9684-E49D2209C6CF@ericsson.com> <CAMRcRGQkRb0T=H8QPtXBGGJc1RedzAhG03kY4PqpHzV-dz3rZQ@mail.gmail.com> <DD293183-30B5-4F0A-8E69-0405181090AA@ericsson.com>
In-Reply-To: <DD293183-30B5-4F0A-8E69-0405181090AA@ericsson.com>
From: Roman Shpount <roman@telurix.com>
Date: Mon, 20 May 2019 18:34:47 -0400
X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: <CAD5OKxvFv-TXf_ytWaEtDn6g7JdDCXW7qiXXRoeCF+8zzPsBpA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAD5OKxvFv-TXf_ytWaEtDn6g7JdDCXW7qiXXRoeCF+8zzPsBpA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>
Cc: Suhas Nandakumar <suhasietf@gmail.com>, Flemming Andreasen <fandreas@cisco.com>, mmusic WG <mmusic@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000008db776058959572b"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mmusic/RcBGNjIn2Mp_seFNZpNdXfUDzxo>
Subject: Re: [MMUSIC] Last chance to comment [Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-mmusic-ice-sip-sdp-27.txt] - Text on ICE PAC
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 22:35:02 -0000

We cannot remove FQDN without breaking compatibility with RFC 5245. Based
on RFC 5245, FQDN can be legally specified in connection-address. FQDN
handling there is nonsensical, but grammar still allows it, so the safest
option is to allow FQDN in connection-address but ignore it.

Regards,
_____________
Roman Shpount


On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 6:31 PM Christer Holmberg <
christer.holmberg@ericsson.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
>
>
> First, if we are going to remove support of FQDN (see other thread), there
> is no need to mention it.
>
>
>
> Second, I don’t think you need to repeat so much of what is defined in ICE
> PAC (which may even still change). I suggest something like:
>
>
>
> “[draft-holmberg-ice-pac] provides guidance on finding working candidate
> pairs, and is useful to prevent premature declaration of ICE failure
>
> e.g., if the peer has not provided any candidates, or if all provided
> candidates have failed or have been discarded.”!
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
>
>
> Christer
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From: *Suhas Nandakumar <suhasietf@gmail.com>
> *Date: *Monday, 20 May 2019 at 22.27
> *To: *Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>
> *Cc: *Flemming Andreasen <fandreas@cisco.com>, "mmusic@ietf.org" <
> mmusic@ietf.org>
> *Subject: *Re: [MMUSIC] Last chance to comment [Re: I-D Action:
> draft-ietf-mmusic-ice-sip-sdp-27.txt] - Text on ICE PAC
>
>
>
> Thanks Christer. I agree with the intent here.
>
>
>
> How about this version
>
>
>
>    “In certain scenarios when either no candidates were provided in the
>
>    offer or all the provided candidates were discarded (say, due to
>
>    unsupported address type or FQDN name resolution failure), the
>
>    answerer MAY treat it as an immediate ICE processing failure or
>
>    choose to wait for the peer reflexive candidates
>
>    to arrive to perform the connectivity checks
>
>    (see [draft-holmberg-ice-pac]. However, If no peer reflexive candidates
>
>    arrive until the connectivity checks timesout, the ICE
>
>    processing is considered as failure."
>
>
>
> On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 1:08 PM Christer Holmberg <
> christer.holmberg@ericsson.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
>
>
> The new text says:
>
>
>
>    “In certain scenarios when either no candidates were provided in the
>
>    offer or all the provided candidates were discarded (say, due to
>
>    unsupported address type or FQDN name resolution failure), the
>
>    answerer MUST NOT consider this as immediate ICE processing failure
>
>    but instead MUST wait for the peer reflexive candidates to arrive to
>
>    carryout the connectivity checks or eventually time out on the
>
>    connectivity checks (see [draft-holmberg-ice-pac]).”
>
>
>
> I don’t think we shall have these MUST NOT and MUST.
>
>
>
> As I have commented in the ICE WG, ICE PAC only gives guidance on how long
> to wait before declaring ICE failure, but an agent is still allowed to
> declare ICE failiure whenever it wants without being non-compliant with the
> spec.
>
>
>
> Also, since ICE PAC is generic ICE, I don’t think ice-sip-sdp shall add
> any normative text in addition to what is already included in ICE PAC.
>
>
>
> However, I do agree that referencing ICE PAC is a good idea, but perhaps
> it’s enough to say that ICE PAC gives guidance.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
>
>
> Christer
>
>
>
>
>
> *From: *mmusic <mmusic-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of Flemming Andreasen <
> fandreas@cisco.com>
> *Date: *Monday, 20 May 2019 at 17.35
> *To: *"mmusic@ietf.org" <mmusic@ietf.org>
> *Subject: *[MMUSIC] Last chance to comment [Re: I-D Action:
> draft-ietf-mmusic-ice-sip-sdp-27.txt]
>
>
>
> Greetings MMUSIC
>
> We believe this version resolves all outstanding issues. This will be the
> last chance to comment before we submit the document for Publication
> Request. If you have any comments, please make sure to provide them to the
> authors and the MMUSIC mailing list no later than Friday May 25.
>
> Thanks
>
> -- Flemming (as MMUSIC co-chair)
>
> On 5/19/19 12:43 AM, Suhas Nandakumar wrote:
>
> Version 27 has editorial changes for using the term connection address
> instead of IP Address.
>
>
>
> Please let us know if you have any questions
>
>
>
> Cheers
>
> Suhas
>
>
>
> On Sat, May 18, 2019 at 9:42 PM <internet-drafts@ietf.org> wrote:
>
>
> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts
> directories.
> This draft is a work item of the Multiparty Multimedia Session Control WG
> of the IETF.
>
>         Title           : Session Description Protocol (SDP) Offer/Answer
> procedures for Interactive Connectivity Establishment (ICE)
>         Authors         : Marc Petit-Huguenin
>                           Suhas Nandakumar
>                           Ari Keranen
>         Filename        : draft-ietf-mmusic-ice-sip-sdp-27.txt
>         Pages           : 42
>         Date            : 2019-05-18
>
> Abstract:
>    This document describes Session Description Protocol (SDP) Offer/
>    Answer procedures for carrying out Interactive Connectivity
>    Establishment (ICE) between the agents.
>
>
> The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mmusic-ice-sip-sdp/
>
> There are also htmlized versions available at:
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-mmusic-ice-sip-sdp-27
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-mmusic-ice-sip-sdp-27
>
> A diff from the previous version is available at:
> https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-mmusic-ice-sip-sdp-27
>
>
> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of
> submission
> until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.
>
> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>