IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: More on demultiplexing

Mikkel Fahnøe Jørgensen <mikkelfj@gmail.com> Wed, 06 December 2017 19:39 UTC

Return-Path: <mikkelfj@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: quic@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: quic@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B2DC127873 for <quic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 6 Dec 2017 11:39:04 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.698
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.698 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 B4MBsdyCNMff for <quic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 6 Dec 2017 11:39:03 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-it0-x233.google.com (mail-it0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c0b::233]) (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 DFC15128959 for <quic@ietf.org>; Wed, 6 Dec 2017 11:39:02 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-it0-x233.google.com with SMTP id m11so21516574iti.1 for <quic@ietf.org>; Wed, 06 Dec 2017 11:39:02 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=TbfzzHfwjx+vCwspmc4q97WUEXf7pXJixTohD0l0R78=; b=q6OGeE0KQrkpH3XrF2w01Wg8rz+d+5buEGVj8/ZfiWj8NlxXRsAo7nqUvQRu5WGhrW q0yo3eK3YJMc+0XYbdxv9l3x+2qM1Wse+tE7pepu0Z4FTQi0bhSL700tXLvlw/04nG16 PKBq4vayCjineBf17512s0sKQDHJuX8nrj/UuifdEJ89chHoB0UsgQN6YkVCo8vNUwgf b9z3O5hXE5blwK3m30W9RZnxv3MdvPjNcGSJjBGOH9eA5133xifApmLC5qL3Gr00Q9xp mLAVbwHDHE2WoEQMBVbqyQwQMLe/m1B5BQ/BCevH64hevPPiLs4WsaVoktfINIwDGSoV ctmg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=TbfzzHfwjx+vCwspmc4q97WUEXf7pXJixTohD0l0R78=; b=a2sIfiT+27Mqen8/ZLU64tv/uwmPi+l+GfOy4pbU1rCc1F9aLolYFF03kDGWFL4j7t L+T6QE1K3EiR8wDePuWgZK7fEo2kM+4C8HlKTUbxeEPlFDgr33K+4Eu7H5/QOIS39oP8 y1ktXpXLD6XCEVOqvuNwDkA7vpui2gxQveTgSWqe8LFiapxB7HqjhDJ7yYkcVmjp7TKD MeTBha6NXw5Y2S8mFUWTtchjCQrRh/oHTyK6GDJLO3WphkFhCyu5Ih/uTurNB6PTGY6E FcPQ1N+Oq9zySm6MB6CIAEDywaqp3gq8zP38jtiOGEQzx+jCG+QGLfEqE6982Acmcu3u hqUQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AJaThX4jT3a3S5RGkl5ik9Wg3cuabXGAaWJRJsGqdzs1DfVoLBcFHfOi qJCv+7emsXIMdO59/nUL5QdRb/1zTFHxWwtvj70pWg==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGs4zMb9mC53cNRHAR0MJGli8Cm1VhvzXjaeODMAiqUDDUzcN5etHTv7M4mE3PULJqBOKg6K559/gt0iZ5OTOYmWwgI=
X-Received: by 10.107.164.225 with SMTP id d94mr33710330ioj.175.1512589142300; Wed, 06 Dec 2017 11:39:02 -0800 (PST)
Received: from 1058052472880 named unknown by gmailapi.google.com with HTTPREST; Wed, 6 Dec 2017 11:39:01 -0800
From: Mikkel Fahnøe Jørgensen <mikkelfj@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CABcZeBPjmQK5Cw5Ctt51cnxHGnV=REraOAfm4eRbWN0jiD5GWw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CABcZeBO=WCTLuuxaOJXKzQdiBduOxLdoqNtMpvPatBOAwNjZkQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAN1APdeUpVf5HTg549O5nn4dhPre1hm=WShUi+_ZKGx8aG-Zbw@mail.gmail.com> <CABcZeBPjmQK5Cw5Ctt51cnxHGnV=REraOAfm4eRbWN0jiD5GWw@mail.gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Airmail (420)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Wed, 06 Dec 2017 11:39:01 -0800
Message-ID: <CAN1APdcyeTx7jjwWf14___-xiBB7i=0KbDday29gejY+=m7K2w@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: More on demultiplexing
To: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>
Cc: IETF QUIC WG <quic@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a11422366849e18055fb11ac9"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic/tXbm09u8sK28GbNs6k_Sbl90o30>
X-BeenThere: quic@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Main mailing list of the IETF QUIC working group <quic.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/quic>, <mailto:quic-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/quic/>
List-Post: <mailto:quic@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:quic-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/quic>, <mailto:quic-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 06 Dec 2017 19:39:04 -0000

I don't understand what you are saying here. WebRTC does not have a defined
port.


I was considering corporate and server firewalls, e.g. having QUIC traffic
piggy backing on open ports for things like video chat, but come to think
of it, this has more to do with NAT traversal.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email