Re: [rtcweb] Proposal to break the ICE impasse

Roman Shpount <roman@telurix.com> Tue, 29 January 2019 18:08 UTC

Return-Path: <roman@telurix.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 38ECB130F3B for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 29 Jan 2019 10:08:13 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.031
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.031 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.142, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, T_SPF_PERMERROR=0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=telurix-com.20150623.gappssmtp.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 857mDK2Mc3Ks for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 29 Jan 2019 10:08:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pg1-x535.google.com (mail-pg1-x535.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::535]) (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 DB0D5130EC9 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 29 Jan 2019 10:08:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pg1-x535.google.com with SMTP id s198so9079571pgs.2 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 29 Jan 2019 10:08:11 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=telurix-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=dC9drDbBaRAiIy54RZOqt/Fl+VsGMlI4FilA5LrRP48=; b=n/1TZRXwa05Ks/08hN1h6wcRo4Ibe6BjXnBJeTMi3nmXWWJV+y0vNO9Av5WoF3ajVP ce7+vqpkYCiT29WqDsG/LAnv2165Fa+cEDZhgX+aXcS9wMFGkKq/3n57U3C3o/zVgVDe oiocNa90lsJwQWPdrgzhmWRHHBBNO/Q0ZdEVpD2Ya/eXzjCluEWCVPk8Eju/MX26CpOm t3HNOh/WLOkryWNaw+Wy2oMvpvE3qldkNI0hxDIT296cYRqhx3APzG425BBtTxEy097p ytIrI8DMg4ce6OUe19DeWexQyOtnfKdpGWFfX4LEhgJyZ7Nmd4zsK/cjEnUOV47MEzwq 94dQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=dC9drDbBaRAiIy54RZOqt/Fl+VsGMlI4FilA5LrRP48=; b=qnX5Wf9TfTKeGTUXxK72vF5yCShe7qBZHi/9RqvO4KZ8PYY2M6J4Gp4GMeRQtW+qCN jg4leXuZhwCpV29Tm0cYXYG7+husRMpktDGK6fRmcEQ/mcLz+rnBA85b5I7JUG9HZjbU IuvQYiDqfU9UR/gaQ1kUTfMwkQ1KfJVrCnJBrbOpQSQuPcaYA2ZktW0F4YXkzP2+h2UL 62rCwPvMxi9dgdGJ0zXWeh789qSq3S3uAr1T/xg/qUgiy2ST8vdqFAd3Cw8Mg6PyuY1Q 9vVjU7SeYqUqRiRPxx82+5gqK+xMNvdpbXNmLg3fQEVxRw6gStDYcxxeDzJfPhvCuv2Q zqjg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AJcUukfby6nFFG73UvhOmmt+vY+9VHNxv7uyFRmizCnyYNQ5IlDclGnI 9qqWlyWZmMF/Ir75QdzFuTvwqCZ52MA=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ALg8bN4jcTpX4aBOBtl4kf1+ATmUL8oggS8Cd+9+LYiA88Vsx/8hBPYXghjX/ICEMxwNeKgQoNSwGA==
X-Received: by 2002:a63:3602:: with SMTP id d2mr24156414pga.404.1548785291266; Tue, 29 Jan 2019 10:08:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pf1-f172.google.com (mail-pf1-f172.google.com. [209.85.210.172]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id d16sm40583122pgj.21.2019.01.29.10.08.10 for <rtcweb@ietf.org> (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 29 Jan 2019 10:08:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pf1-f172.google.com with SMTP id z9so10029159pfi.2 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 29 Jan 2019 10:08:10 -0800 (PST)
X-Received: by 2002:a62:160d:: with SMTP id 13mr26993242pfw.203.1548785290242; Tue, 29 Jan 2019 10:08:10 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <97ed2641-8a7e-19a9-be38-a3458ca9212e@nostrum.com> <CABcZeBP9t0SgsHAuENo99D6ffKd7Mw0Xs1vzUCOzSS=WJN5z8A@mail.gmail.com> <HE1PR07MB3161B0F1D2B5AC9DA72DDFAD93950@HE1PR07MB3161.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com> <CAOJ7v-3KHi0TUDsQvG6qq-qeNGBsqLxg+NC1c+Nxvgy0ks0d0g@mail.gmail.com> <CABcZeBNL=sWFfh=zwiuib80HPsno=GzF18gU+z3DrCZTK_PquA@mail.gmail.com> <CA+9kkMDh56CeXRGNSk_r-HrLkDNT5DnYc_FguXOdeccfq=LEMA@mail.gmail.com> <CABcZeBPboLf0bLUDTyJArxsPYSnUrULArmsZ9YshQCX+rEvexA@mail.gmail.com> <CA+9kkMCwCBHWEEADxVHT2ZbvWEi=bUBJ22icKHpA2p8Kg1fF9A@mail.gmail.com> <CALiegfnpj+Pu0Hg05iqHXCwhTefxn_Em7gTnzOXK897fzcyuwg@mail.gmail.com> <CAD5OKxvmQHT3TAt_=xCd_JKnPzXfnc=Mej-mr6KMsaKVoBkuSg@mail.gmail.com> <CALiegfm_jtv1bV3Ok6j20hkim8e6QxMYPrbbHejqoHnCHjMXpA@mail.gmail.com> <CAD5OKxsMWEE39O6hSc+UFjwTAa=z1A+XD5X2BY=Q7PEUdYE4UA@mail.gmail.com> <961E55AE-2072-4145-8BCF-62D67C6D150F@mozilla.com> <CALiegf=QaxTVjsQkspE2G9=EbMyGkSfuLf45tdGN0LY-mthB2g@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CALiegf=QaxTVjsQkspE2G9=EbMyGkSfuLf45tdGN0LY-mthB2g@mail.gmail.com>
From: Roman Shpount <roman@telurix.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2019 13:07:59 -0500
X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: <CAD5OKxtKn4tj+YRJUpgOCmjtLviUusgs1R8wRoOgUdLz+pA8cQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAD5OKxtKn4tj+YRJUpgOCmjtLviUusgs1R8wRoOgUdLz+pA8cQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: =?UTF-8?Q?I=C3=B1aki_Baz_Castillo?= <ibc@aliax.net>
Cc: Nils Ohlmeier <nohlmeier@mozilla.com>, RTCWeb IETF <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000000ef16905809cad6b"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtcweb/LnSw40EUVtEv7XEweFcI49dYgjM>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Proposal to break the ICE impasse
X-BeenThere: rtcweb@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Tue, 29 Jan 2019 18:08:13 -0000

On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 12:51 PM Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net> wrote:

> On Tue, 29 Jan 2019 at 18:46, Nils Ohlmeier <nohlmeier@mozilla.com> wrote:
> >
> > What I don’t quite understand here: 1-4 with the initial connection will
> use UDP in the protocol field. Only the subsequent re-offer from step 5 on
> would use TCP in the protocol field. How come that 1-4 works, but 5 does
> not?
>
> The sysadmin realized about dangerous and suspicious UDP traffic so
> changed the firewall rules. He also blocked ICMP (for security!!!) but
> that's not a problem because static constexpr uint16_t MTU = 1200.
>
>
This has absolutely nothing to do whit what we are discussing.
_____________
Roman Shpount