IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] [tram] TURN permissions for private ips

Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com> Wed, 05 August 2015 22:09 UTC

Return-Path: <ekr@rtfm.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 815811ACDDE for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Aug 2015 15:09:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.977
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.977 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=unavailable
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 F7h4p_Xgqz-l for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Aug 2015 15:09:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wi0-f170.google.com (mail-wi0-f170.google.com [209.85.212.170]) (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 C907E1ACD90 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Wed, 5 Aug 2015 15:08:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by wibhh20 with SMTP id hh20so43205870wib.0 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Wed, 05 Aug 2015 15:08:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=scMeaxAYK6QixKG8huP9LX2WydgfT7c3sPy+ZkhGjIo=; b=Hsatma2WvbElmTBW4ENQYIZzb6gwOv4+g525AB9raoJQR+TJDNxEx38alSboKPvgux 7csr5NFv7elMjbAZJwqDZvdXz26DUQhiIq0wm3HGwx7oiMLOTgeYKZ7ex+xgdjhD/6qm oYuyBGyOVVBLOVkIEWl1BSEpKk0H4O81a3TyyXGk8nhYiDkh9t2z5qr8ror2aJRMlYeH t+txAqB7hp5Gm8BG1kICzIqAIlcyG1R24ELE8Hq9rqOmAhytUuI6C5TRlQ7u2GVaxgeT Yvo16A30o8eRQRNGrADrS821NKSQXvk4Fayl4jSKpJeoxxwB88ZDK1+lj+tVUPEY0Tlt uIsw==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlc7oOR+7PFwTFmYm8FzKuu6hyDyxt2u4dpt8U1bMJ9otcVy+kKDusTTIQX6OOmxNmupgDY
X-Received: by 10.180.91.79 with SMTP id cc15mr297128wib.53.1438812535541; Wed, 05 Aug 2015 15:08:55 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.27.85.86 with HTTP; Wed, 5 Aug 2015 15:08:16 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <55C287A4.8050600@jive.com>
References: <20150805130607.20844.70680.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <CABcZeBMWVU9a1_e_47qddA04WhXG55QYzFA=dTrYgi+DuLQhKA@mail.gmail.com> <55C24293.5000603@cs.tcd.ie> <55C24C09.8020404@goodadvice.pages.de> <55C256C8.80606@jive.com> <CAOJ7v-3hyFhHiFq4eujLznXtehkUSxZati8YZ23o-RPLH=J5zg@mail.gmail.com> <55C287A4.8050600@jive.com>
From: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>
Date: Wed, 05 Aug 2015 15:08:16 -0700
Message-ID: <CABcZeBMuz1_hLVyPoOJXutMkDXJzbrxR6-v1B458_QUbNnF-7A@mail.gmail.com>
To: Simon Perreault <sperreault@jive.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="f46d043be246146720051c97a664"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtcweb/S1EqjsoEqfAv16EsUPP0Vb2VtxY>
Cc: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>, "tram@ietf.org" <tram@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] [tram] TURN permissions for private ips
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: <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: Wed, 05 Aug 2015 22:09:38 -0000

I think I too am in favor of this change.

On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 3:01 PM, Simon Perreault <sperreault@jive.com> wrote:

> Le 2015-08-05 17:35, Justin Uberti a écrit :
> > I am somewhat sympathetic to that, but given that there is measurable
> > downside here - extra candidate pairs that take time to check - can you
> > supply a concrete example of where the client choosing not to pair a
> > TURN candidate with a RFC1918 address would cause a problem?
>
> I can't!
>
> Philipp's proposal certainly does make practical sense when you consider
> it as an ugly optimization hack rather than something that is necessary
> to make things work. Phrase it so that this is clear and I'll be all for
> it. :)
>
> Simon
>
> _______________________________________________
> rtcweb mailing list
> rtcweb@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email