Re: [rtcweb] rtcweb-transports reference to TRAM discovery

https://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-tram-turn-server-discovery-00.txt makes the claim that it is needed for "WebRTC usage" and in fact claims that it is needed by WebRTC "immediately".

I was just pointing out that if this is the case then it should be referenced from a RTCWEB draft.

If you think the discovery mechanism is not suitable for WebRTC usage then please make that comment to the TRAM WG list.

Andy

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Cullen Jennings (fluffy) [mailto:fluffy@cisco.com]
> Sent: 18 December 2014 17:24
> To: Hutton, Andrew
> Cc: rtcweb@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [rtcweb] rtcweb-transports reference to TRAM discovery
> 
> 
> It seems that in the mobile case and many residential cases, doing that
> draft would allow a service provider to force all the traffic through a
> TURN server of the service providers choosing. Am I reading this
> correctly because I am pretty sure I would not be in favor of that.
> 
> 
> > On Dec 15, 2014, at 7:42 AM, Hutton, Andrew <andrew.hutton@unify.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > I am thinking that https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-rtcweb-
> transports-07#section-3.4 should include a requirement that a WebRTC
> Browser MUST support the TURN server discovery as described in
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-tram-turn-server-discovery-00.
> >
> >
> > Andy
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > rtcweb mailing list
> > rtcweb@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb