IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] Transports questions on IPv6

Justin Uberti <juberti@google.com> Wed, 05 March 2014 15:27 UTC

Return-Path: <juberti@google.com>
X-Original-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1937C1A01CA for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Mar 2014 07:27:08 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.925
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.925 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.547, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 7YJAOBlwPptq for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Mar 2014 07:27:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-vc0-x235.google.com (mail-vc0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400c:c03::235]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EECD91A00C2 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Wed, 5 Mar 2014 07:27:04 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-vc0-f181.google.com with SMTP id lg15so1156822vcb.26 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Wed, 05 Mar 2014 07:27:01 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=6qM9jBdl0or+ZieDwALz5NQfqjkb3autVrGm+UNPtN0=; b=DqoNzb/Zq6ZEP+Sff7xoMkSzxAWGWA2enf1MQ/zjK8IQhXpoUgGqaOvcf+tL9EOO29 GPb0pzdWRG72rXrSUBafvNg8CZY91WjUxQJvye1UWo0m3dLIgbv6WomCTUDKgP3oOycM 5/TXX4NC4ZLWUso1dXNi8owyjoKie8W9i1hy2LFYzjpB+2qxwDEwR1pYfYnD59GLhgl8 Um3jmhDLTdvl+zxHJHZNRSklpzTB58WrZAZRwThJG0U1Q52/Wq7EcmspObrHWsxM/4Cb q+02PwibiemZyp31xFEfwoSOPm7TAdnkHr8aZp0KuY0ZKsti7oA114Uhm/FhWCN29FbJ w7Iw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=6qM9jBdl0or+ZieDwALz5NQfqjkb3autVrGm+UNPtN0=; b=ZLMJ5hxk5OVDti1y2wIc10WySJvTPCbnary9KhVijnGRiP/2MUg5Kz/TKUhYydjord +7zsJPrHQ51uUtlRwobEt2LTixnkhjIT/MKKagLGRDsGY/1fM+Nsf+HwZjbIB0X3nsGj iNFyJMCco4Iudu2dROu8rs5W2D7/cdSXRVF+XDqzc11iWFL45mc38Lcp8Mbo4ysgoRlF x2k2TK9Q7iuGTK1z1MMWvCyA6YUcKC0f6WnsXqnISkXLOHSXxpzlyvO8nTjDl3GGbPhY LXqGfTELECDQZ3bf2zjyjW9iJubElhuDamH3TTl7ofDa0BeUMtDlPwMJu6s+aMjF8sAZ hhYw==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmEeNnv6ZATkJ0kogXH/UvvS56p2FHyWsngx9rVQ7AjiCFHuZrL265lN4qz+RAZ1Fk4cv2GuqJEX/TtfKzb7FA/Jy/zoAuEECVazvzSyJD6Q70/gBJPeYJbt+x9Ed2CT3rY/clzuHQTqV635bsHpMiHz+P9BjA7GKhwmmz4uYW6gORW4CuDamV8o0Fa8PCSOTiSR4Hv
X-Received: by 10.58.123.70 with SMTP id ly6mr728031veb.26.1394033221185; Wed, 05 Mar 2014 07:27:01 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.52.26.43 with HTTP; Wed, 5 Mar 2014 07:26:41 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <531740DD.5030700@viagenie.ca>
References: <CAOJ7v-3vukxXzUN5ttEnJ0dTu2YX=N7qdPDqzy8iXaRwMuH7eQ@mail.gmail.com> <531740DD.5030700@viagenie.ca>
From: Justin Uberti <juberti@google.com>
Date: Wed, 05 Mar 2014 15:26:41 +0000
Message-ID: <CAOJ7v-2nMyyamdDSUgxn+dnxTeRYsOMgnXLupZkf-EXuCxYZ2g@mail.gmail.com>
To: Simon Perreault <simon.perreault@viagenie.ca>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="089e0118490ef448ea04f3dda6ae"
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtcweb/6Lt2I-TKp0pO3LVLn5VBCijW008
Cc: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Transports questions on IPv6
X-BeenThere: rtcweb@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Wed, 05 Mar 2014 15:27:08 -0000

On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 3:21 PM, Simon Perreault <simon.perreault@viagenie.ca
> wrote:

> Le 2014-03-05 14:56, Justin Uberti a écrit :
> > I think this needs clarification. Does this mean that we should allocate
> v6 candidates from all v4 interfaces (for compat with v6-only endpoints),
> as well as allocate v4 candidates from all v6 interfaces (for compat with
> v4-only endpoints), and if so, which path (v6-to-TURN or v6-from-TURN)
> should be prioritized?
>
> You must always allocate both v4 and v6 relayed candidates, irrespective
> of what other candidates you have.
>

I am fine with that - this needs to be added to the transports document
though.

Any thoughts on the prioritization question?

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email