[MMUSIC] Re: [BEHAVE] RE: Moving draft-marjou-behave-app-rtp-keepalive to AVT

On 4 Jun 2007, at 21:54, Dan Wing wrote:
>> On 2007-6-1, at 21:09, ext Dan Wing wrote:
>>> We need a document that consolidates NAT keepalive mechanisms for
>>> UDP-based protocols, most notably RTP (and, to a lesser extent,
>>> SIP).  Currently this is spread in various documents and there
>>> is no consolidated guidance to implementtors on the strength
>>> or weakness of various approaches.
>>
>> I'm wondering if it'd make sense to add this guidance as a
>> section in
>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-tsvwg-udp-guidelines?
>
> I agree "send periodic UDP traffic" would be good in that
> document.  REQ-6 of draft-ford-behave-app-05 may provide the
> beginnings of some useful text (CC'ing the authors of that
> document).
>
> As with all applications on today's Internet, an RTP
> application needs to be robust and able to deal with whatever
> is sent to it, so perhaps you're right -- an application-
> specific keepalive document may well be overly specific and
> we should, rather, document what any UDP-based application
> should do to prevent middleboxes (such as NATs) from
> clobbering a flow.

The udp-guidelines draft should probably outline what sort of keep  
alive mechanism is needed, but the implementation is likely protocol  
specific, and should be done by the group designing that protocol, I  
think.

-- 
Colin Perkins
http://csperkins.org/

_______________________________________________
mmusic mailing list
mmusic@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic