IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] Same location media

Bernard Aboba <bernard_aboba@hotmail.com> Thu, 20 October 2011 16:48 UTC

Return-Path: <bernard_aboba@hotmail.com>
X-Original-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4364921F8C6D for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 20 Oct 2011 09:48:23 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.426
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.426 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.172, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 OKU3brperr7P for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 20 Oct 2011 09:48:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from blu0-omc1-s28.blu0.hotmail.com (blu0-omc1-s28.blu0.hotmail.com [65.55.116.39]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 57B0021F8C68 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 20 Oct 2011 09:48:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from BLU152-W65 ([65.55.116.9]) by blu0-omc1-s28.blu0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Thu, 20 Oct 2011 09:48:21 -0700
Message-ID: <BLU152-W6591495353D395650050F293EB0@phx.gbl>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_6cb35439-6428-4cfa-aa48-e312d655682f_"
X-Originating-IP: [24.17.217.162]
From: Bernard Aboba <bernard_aboba@hotmail.com>
To: roman@telurix.com
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 09:48:21 -0700
Importance: Normal
In-Reply-To: <CAD5OKxuooQzhmyHFi87XNPwiNqB7ohzhcbOWEsvCn-Zkshc9kQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAD5OKxuJi_VS9fRc4P6GN-StWzMhMHAQ2MyO8zJVsMfEeQRftg@mail.gmail.com>, <BLU152-W274DC7DC92EF49307BC57D93EB0@phx.gbl>, <CAD5OKxuooQzhmyHFi87XNPwiNqB7ohzhcbOWEsvCn-Zkshc9kQ@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 20 Oct 2011 16:48:21.0753 (UTC) FILETIME=[13AE9E90:01CC8F48]
Cc: rtcweb@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Same location media
X-BeenThere: rtcweb@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Real-Time Communication in WEB-browsers working group list <rtcweb.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rtcweb>, <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rtcweb>
List-Post: <mailto:rtcweb@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb>, <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 16:48:23 -0000

Roman said:

"Technically speaking, if TURN server relay address is used, connectivity between the RTC client and TURN server can be TCP (or TLS). So, ICE check would be delivered to the RTC client via TCP tunnel."

[BA] Yes, that can be done.  But often we find that a firewall that does not permit UDP traversal also has strict policies about TCP (e.g. only to a strict set of destination ports).    This is why HTTP traversal is implemented by almost all Web conferencing services.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email