IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] Same location media

Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net> Thu, 20 October 2011 16:56 UTC

Return-Path: <ibc@aliax.net>
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 6D69E21F869E for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 20 Oct 2011 09:56:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.634
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.634 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.043, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
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 q7OBosQhW1bu for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 20 Oct 2011 09:56:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-vx0-f172.google.com (mail-vx0-f172.google.com [209.85.220.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E1F6521F8678 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 20 Oct 2011 09:55:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by vcbfo1 with SMTP id fo1so3189176vcb.31 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 20 Oct 2011 09:55:59 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.182.124.70 with SMTP id mg6mr283826obb.54.1319129759219; Thu, 20 Oct 2011 09:55:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.182.144.9 with HTTP; Thu, 20 Oct 2011 09:55:59 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <BLU152-W6591495353D395650050F293EB0@phx.gbl>
References: <CAD5OKxuJi_VS9fRc4P6GN-StWzMhMHAQ2MyO8zJVsMfEeQRftg@mail.gmail.com> <BLU152-W274DC7DC92EF49307BC57D93EB0@phx.gbl> <CAD5OKxuooQzhmyHFi87XNPwiNqB7ohzhcbOWEsvCn-Zkshc9kQ@mail.gmail.com> <BLU152-W6591495353D395650050F293EB0@phx.gbl>
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 18:55:59 +0200
Message-ID: <CALiegfnoeNY-6K80j6=yLfggnGNmfrf+iHFCfvXA=eg1czDVaQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net>
To: Bernard Aboba <bernard_aboba@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
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 16:56:00 -0000

2011/10/20 Bernard Aboba <bernard_aboba@hotmail.com>:
> "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.

Well, if the network admin does not want that internet works, then
this is the end. But we cannot follow the "WWW vision" of making
internet just TCP port 80/443.

-- 
Iñaki Baz Castillo
<ibc@aliax.net>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email