IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [pntaw] New version of draft-hutton-rtcweb-nat-firewall-considerations

Melinda Shore <melinda.shore@gmail.com> Mon, 23 September 2013 16:11 UTC

Return-Path: <melinda.shore@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: pntaw@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: pntaw@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F382621F9E76 for <pntaw@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 23 Sep 2013 09:11:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.443
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.443 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, SUBJECT_FUZZY_TION=0.156]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id hWDAZ57IM4hv for <pntaw@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 23 Sep 2013 09:11:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pa0-x22e.google.com (mail-pa0-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c03::22e]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 94F7821F8EEA for <pntaw@ietf.org>; Mon, 23 Sep 2013 09:11:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pa0-f46.google.com with SMTP id fa1so3770396pad.33 for <pntaw@ietf.org>; Mon, 23 Sep 2013 09:11:06 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=2IIqm7dY6lilHAVbxOEJxNS3PQ+0bYwnJwM/UCCPN4w=; b=n8SEb4iuJIVaYK0EBAqEDL1fCKiyUZmGle4/j3AbW/nDv3qBFFY2RoJ1CaOKGCbC07 S6tBXFf2yV0WLlWabT2h4f/DSSWXNGtOSXF3XGQOwB5dUc3pDqYG538taNBFoZY72HgT iv7PzSuQOwzMGTnaVdFUQqQREzcOa5qQBRuE7WNwE3uaOBPGXZRBMoKcnbKM6+OfMyQM Qvl2DX2RH6b4L1HZ2Snna+TM3Ur+CLLBWqaEH7fCRO5fIBPaOWibV4JDiOWu9ccjPaEh 0+tGDhAUGHSYg5Ui1NV/SzNPU3Re2MXngrsDQGm5AFnvp517LoJPJ8GDRaY7vFTHwlP7 OOkA==
X-Received: by 10.66.251.1 with SMTP id zg1mr2847732pac.160.1379952666342; Mon, 23 Sep 2013 09:11:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from spandex.local (63-140-98-62.dynamic.dsl.acsalaska.net. [63.140.98.62]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id gg10sm35041332pbc.46.1969.12.31.16.00.00 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 23 Sep 2013 09:11:05 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <52406815.9060507@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2013 08:11:01 -0800
From: Melinda Shore <melinda.shore@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130620 Thunderbird/17.0.7
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: pntaw@ietf.org
References: <9F33F40F6F2CD847824537F3C4E37DDF17BCF3A5@MCHP04MSX.global-ad.net> <523CCD06.3030902@gmail.com> <BLU169-W136A55AC013DA147313576D93220@phx.gbl> <523CD42E.8070102@gmail.com> <BLU169-W82036280852F26ED26283C93230@phx.gbl> <523D4F17.2040202@gmail.com> <9F33F40F6F2CD847824537F3C4E37DDF17BD01A8@MCHP04MSX.global-ad.net> <CALDtMrL5pT3MfbQufCphEKq0-pXj+JcfwW__wzG3T6wZ=TuWhg@mail.gmail.com> <9F33F40F6F2CD847824537F3C4E37DDF17BD08EA@MCHP04MSX.global-ad.net> <CALDtMrLcUrxseyiaPc_0AWJw3HPdaBuAS+xpviT2q=y4zmdNgw@mail.gmail.com> <523FD5FD.8030601@gmail.com> <5240025C.6080807@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <5240025C.6080807@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [pntaw] New version of draft-hutton-rtcweb-nat-firewall-considerations
X-BeenThere: pntaw@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discussion list for practices related to proxies, NATs, TURN, and WebRTC" <pntaw.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/pntaw>, <mailto:pntaw-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/pntaw>
List-Post: <mailto:pntaw@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:pntaw-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pntaw>, <mailto:pntaw-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2013 16:11:07 -0000

On 9/23/13 12:57 AM, Sergio Garcia Murillo wrote:
> Regarding the security section that you mention in a later email, I
> agree with you again
> and it is a chapter we would have to address in next versions of the
> draft. Would you
> be willing to collaborate in writing it by listing which kind of issues
> would you like to be
> covered in there?

Yes, definitely.  The state of security considerations
text is something that should be considered a priority.
FWIW I don't think that protecting pinhole-punching
technologies from being subverted by attackers is easy.

Melinda

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email