Re: [rtcweb] IP handling: Using mDNS names for host candidates

Given the general support here, I'll start writing up a PR to incorporate
the aforementioned changes, with the goal to avoid emitting private IPv4
addresses in the default mode.

On Tue, Jun 12, 2018 at 12:14 PM Justin Uberti <juberti@google.com> wrote:

> One option could be that Mode 2 incorporates RFC 4941 stateless IPv6
> addresses, if supported. Otherwise, mDNS is used. This mode would never
> include RFC 1918 IPv4 addresses.
>
> This would work well in more environments and still provide significant
> privacy improvements.
>
> On Tue, Jun 12, 2018 at 12:08 PM Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com> wrote:
>
>> I’d like to point out that, while this works fine in most residential
>> settings, it’s pretty broken for multi-segment enterprise deployments.
>>
>> /a
>>
>> On Jun 12, 2018, at 11:55, Ted Hardie <ted.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 12, 2018 at 2:40 AM, Justin Uberti <
>> juberti=40google.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> This is a significant improvement and I think we will want to
>>> incorporate this suggestion. Is this something we could do as part of this
>>> WGLC, or should we look for another option?
>>>
>>>
>> Without having cleared this with Cullen or Sean, my personal chair-hat
>> opinion is that we can do this in WGLC.  If a new technical solution is
>> found during WG last call, I see no reason not to incorporate it.
>>
>> That said, I see two no-hats issues that will want pretty strong text.
>> The first is that these are really UUIDs, not traditional mDNS names.
>> We'll need text to strongly discourage the re-use of an existing mDNS name,
>> since those can leak other information.  Second, we'll need text on what to
>> do if this name can't be registered or resolved in a particular environment
>> (not every network supports mDNS, after all).  Does it go back to the
>> previous Mode 2 behavior, or skip private addresses entirely?  I think the
>> right idea is "go back to the previous Mode 2 behavior" personally, but
>> text on it one way or the other is required.
>>
>> regards,
>>
>> Ted
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> rtcweb mailing list
>>> rtcweb@ietf.org
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb
>>>
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> rtcweb mailing list
>> rtcweb@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb
>>
>>