IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] ICE-Lite, Was: I-D Action: draft-ietf-rtcweb-stun-consent-freshness-02.txt

"Karl Stahl" <karl.stahl@intertex.se> Sat, 12 April 2014 09:57 UTC

Return-Path: <karl.stahl@intertex.se>
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 C0F801A02D3 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 12 Apr 2014 02:57:11 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MSGID_MULTIPLE_AT=1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] 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 OQPAwIH2jNb9 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 12 Apr 2014 02:57:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp.it-norr.com (smtp.it-norr.com [80.244.64.163]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 071DD1A0179 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Sat, 12 Apr 2014 02:57:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ([90.229.134.75]) by smtp.it-norr.com (Telecom3 SMTP service) with ASMTP id 201404121157033593; Sat, 12 Apr 2014 11:57:03 +0200
From: "Karl Stahl" <karl.stahl@intertex.se>
To: "'Christer Holmberg'" <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>, "'Harald Alvestrand'" <harald@alvestrand.no>, "'Martin Thomson'" <martin.thomson@gmail.com>, "'Ram Mohan R \(rmohanr\)'" <rmohanr@cisco.com>
References: <20140411033753.19230.46577.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <CF6D6F0C.878CF%rmohanr@cisco.com> <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B1D2BD7C3@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se> <CF6D8F50.87A2E%rmohanr@cisco.com> <CF6E24CE.87C6C%rmohanr@cisco.com> <CABkgnnUHXXEyNrRetFMUvpqF5mreHWL4LijvhG+QSQAQxkzHZQ@mail.gmail.com> <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B1D2BF6E5@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se> <eb4ad62a-d30d-4a03-8c28-061cd0105d5f@email.android.com> <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B1D2BFE90@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se>
In-Reply-To: <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B1D2BFE90@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se>
Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2014 11:57:10 +0200
Message-ID: <024c01cf5635$92835650$b78a02f0$@stahl@intertex.se>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_024D_01CF5646.560C2650"
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0
Thread-Index: AQHPVTeOIZagSP6uQkS1AgMrcrQE2JsLugCAgABAKVD//9+CAIAAt9gAgAAIw4CAAEbFcIAAe6KAgABKBnCAABKvUA==
Content-Language: sv
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtcweb/PDrQ8LlwEF9sUzgyQpAJvqzJVhk
Cc: rtcweb@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] ICE-Lite, Was: I-D Action: draft-ietf-rtcweb-stun-consent-freshness-02.txt
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: Sat, 12 Apr 2014 09:57:11 -0000

To avoid confusion…

 

Gateways are not mentioned in draft-ietf-rtcweb-transports-03

 

Under 3.5.  Middle box related functions 

It too simply says:

ICE [RFC5245] MUST be supported.  The implementation MUST be a full

   ICE implementation, not ICE-Lite.

 

It needs to be said that gateways, i.e. devices having a media port on a public IP address – never behind a NAT/firewall – SHOULD implement ICE-Lite. (which browsers implementing full ICE correctly are compatible with – and has to be – which we all have the same understanding of, I believe)

 

 

/Karl

 

 

Från: rtcweb [mailto:rtcweb-bounces@ietf.org] För Christer Holmberg
Skickat: den 12 april 2014 10:26
Till: Harald Alvestrand; Martin Thomson; Ram Mohan R (rmohanr)
Kopia: rtcweb@ietf.org
Ämne: Re: [rtcweb] I-D Action: draft-ietf-rtcweb-stun-consent-freshness-02.txt

 

Hi,

 

It’s not about running a browser on ice-lite – it is about a browser being prepared to run with a remote endpoint that is running ice-lite (e.g. a gateway). Certain browser implementations have had some problems with that, afaik…

 

Regards,

 

Christer

 

From: Harald Alvestrand [mailto:harald@alvestrand.no] 
Sent: 12 April 2014 08:59
To: Christer Holmberg; Martin Thomson; Ram Mohan R (rmohanr)
Cc: rtcweb@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] I-D Action: draft-ietf-rtcweb-stun-consent-freshness-02.txt

 

Seems we have another reason why running a browser on ice-lite is a bad idea. Good that we do not allow that.

On 11. april 2014 22:37:55 CEST, Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com> wrote:

Hi,

 With ICE-lite mode since the ICE-lite endpoint does not typically 
 generate any binding requests, it may not generate STUN consent as well.


Wat?

Consent is generated by responding to connectivity checks.  An ICE-lite endpoint has to do that.


Sure, but I guess what is meant is that the ICE-lite endpoint does not generate STUN consent REQUESTS.

Regards,

Christer


  _____  


rtcweb mailing list
rtcweb@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb


-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

v2.8.10 | Report a Bug | By Email