Re: [rtcweb] UDP transport problem
Cb B <cb.list6@gmail.com> Thu, 13 February 2014 17:56 UTC
Return-Path: <cb.list6@gmail.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 B08CC1A039B for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 13 Feb 2014 09:56:46 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.75
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.75 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
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 J05zuOk4nVYB for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 13 Feb 2014 09:56:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-wi0-x234.google.com (mail-wi0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c05::234]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F1A51A02A7 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 13 Feb 2014 09:56:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-wi0-f180.google.com with SMTP id hm4so8983671wib.1 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 13 Feb 2014 09:56:43 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=h9xpP6FZhFpPxD4qMgGppo9m9hTAHxYgyfdJ/OCfl8Y=; b=rstFKNH9QE22/0u1JO1wana1SfgZsCpTHhuDjMx9Z0XyV/HAJKFc+v6WC1OlNXFAXW LiENo425GsBgDiBCgL/KueKeKyFDxBw1/zZt0Jnt2oZ77h1EkmY24vPsOwNdwVJ3NI6o 0H0FzyBPXAE85EaqgB6NWZfDdLWQ+JW/pqqU38rNH7TBDTK1/CWp97KLhOEBK9L973zT UJ+2SjmgXUrEqdRXO4QjAROZbGJnT6yyklkM0zvdUmNL+D6TNGwFTYh0HtbZwoWebiGl p2K49JrYqYLZSb0VJt1npW0QlJlURMrqg9VCEqW4ilWohxTe2fAogFZFGXxUXj5xBRl0 PcDQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.194.108.41 with SMTP id hh9mr53012wjb.89.1392314203679; Thu, 13 Feb 2014 09:56:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.194.133.169 with HTTP; Thu, 13 Feb 2014 09:56:43 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CABkgnnVbZp7yBvpY1ARuaBXS=TOipY=BhXzrd=h5DY-76oF9Pw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAD6AjGRiQ1UF5n3JG9HPRQFM+TD54Xz-dpTn5u9bX+__BMfesQ@mail.gmail.com> <CABkgnnVbZp7yBvpY1ARuaBXS=TOipY=BhXzrd=h5DY-76oF9Pw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2014 09:56:43 -0800
Message-ID: <CAD6AjGSxS4jNRGotsE_no0XhewvDqcVZ+Kmx1aMW9qorqSKR+w@mail.gmail.com>
From: Cb B <cb.list6@gmail.com>
To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtcweb/O5fDyI93niq1c45WhGeoWVnBjT0
Cc: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] UDP transport problem
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: Thu, 13 Feb 2014 17:56:46 -0000
On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 9:47 AM, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> wrote: > On 12 February 2014 22:06, Cb B <cb.list6@gmail.com> wrote: >> For about a year now, i have been very concerned about IPv4 UDP. It >> has been increasingly associated with DDoS traffic [1], > > Is your concern that WebRTC will increase the potential for DoS (which > would presume the DoS mitigation measures in ICE [RFC 5245] are > insufficient), or is it just that UDP is so toxic to network operators > that you predict it will be turned off? My concern is that IPv4 UDP is so toxic it will be blocked. It may be wise to start SCTP in the standard from the start. Cameron
- Re: [rtcweb] UDP transport problem Martin Thomson
- [rtcweb] UDP transport problem Cb B
- Re: [rtcweb] UDP transport problem Cb B
- Re: [rtcweb] UDP transport problem Matthew Kaufman
- Re: [rtcweb] UDP transport problem Cb B
- Re: [rtcweb] UDP transport problem Michael Tuexen
- Re: [rtcweb] UDP transport problem Harald Alvestrand
- Re: [rtcweb] UDP transport problem Cb B
- Re: [rtcweb] UDP transport problem cowwoc
- Re: [rtcweb] UDP transport problem Ted Hardie
- Re: [rtcweb] UDP transport problem Cb B
- Re: [rtcweb] UDP transport problem Cb B
- Re: [rtcweb] UDP transport problem Harald Alvestrand
- Re: [rtcweb] UDP transport problem Ted Hardie
- Re: [rtcweb] UDP transport problem Dave Taht
- Re: [rtcweb] UDP transport problem Cb B
- Re: [rtcweb] UDP transport problem cowwoc
- Re: [rtcweb] UDP transport problem Cb B
- Re: [rtcweb] UDP transport problem Dave Taht
- Re: [rtcweb] UDP transport problem Dave Taht
- Re: [rtcweb] UDP transport problem Harald Alvestrand
- Re: [rtcweb] UDP transport problem cowwoc
- Re: [rtcweb] UDP transport problem Dave Taht
- Re: [rtcweb] UDP transport problem Michael Tuexen
- Re: [rtcweb] UDP transport problem Randell Jesup
- Re: [rtcweb] UDP transport problem Cb B
- Re: [rtcweb] UDP transport problem cowwoc
- Re: [rtcweb] UDP transport problem Harald Alvestrand
- Re: [rtcweb] UDP transport problem Harald Alvestrand
- Re: [rtcweb] UDP transport problem Tim Panton
- Re: [rtcweb] UDP transport problem Tim Panton
- Re: [rtcweb] UDP transport problem Jeremy Laurenson (jlaurens)
- Re: [rtcweb] UDP transport problem Cynthia G. Anderson