IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] Nils comments [Was: WGLC for draft-ietf-rtcweb-ip-handling]

Nils Ohlmeier <nohlmeier@mozilla.com> Fri, 04 May 2018 16:50 UTC

Return-Path: <nohlmeier@mozilla.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 3F797129C70 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 4 May 2018 09:50:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=mozilla.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 g6tMgTtquNu3 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 4 May 2018 09:50:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pf0-x22c.google.com (mail-pf0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c00::22c]) (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 07F9C129C6A for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Fri, 4 May 2018 09:50:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pf0-x22c.google.com with SMTP id v63so17859836pfk.8 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Fri, 04 May 2018 09:50:14 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mozilla.com; s=google; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=o1iP3GTYEthYrCNFX8zjfHs+B9flusfhKmaYRizxR9Q=; b=ELCBhXlbub7Q1Y6/kWMLV2LgX5Tet3ALn9jxUxdgfaoy3i1zi2furL6/cALqpaaY8f NBw1rUCo1NjoIQuR1VOOMFsYYfHPuTFnxlCEKV1Mgb6QYQLMSDDQRDBLPl7pa8Xl5Yy4 vkJXUGnkLhvHceEWPpZIuGVcPlWTOI8Pj2zBU=
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=o1iP3GTYEthYrCNFX8zjfHs+B9flusfhKmaYRizxR9Q=; b=aVbZFJUEmzobsOuOoHFDZz7JiA78jbggfr5AUyy1c8NKrgVw06FsUAJ8NCr7dwvu1k ldHA5Na6bEICGpC+ty0sneSrFOZR7p9NJ4bG5Qr6FRJMxaJNiaQzz+latAOwgTGKYew6 1TIYddRhXlKmcRzHFcYoh3KuF18R5AG2RScLmb1kAxO6E1a67M6PTWSno8yDiY9L2xkx Fv8xIQ0W7Xsy2jMfE607xdrS+lMIVN5Co/N1VUXkyBU72v3WalYvndKDaTb7W0ticF2h OnLzEERVBH3uBWNkZIbPey9PXgPlPDBfVIMkwhjnYVwaG7pByqAaSejQ3JiXZiIPGvAy LyDA==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALQs6tCE3Nt3UhBh7gK9ky6k5qo2RPu5+X2xADq210cz8WmBqnhibTa1 q0nhLP/c8SeH0YZ/+RV4FtbI8w==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AB8JxZrf2wdKhTpjqe9goDMNhnpnkhrjRRzrtDT1nCpe9A97d+llZB3uG50CDAtbfMECakd78Dleow==
X-Received: by 2002:a63:6185:: with SMTP id v127-v6mr22717063pgb.441.1525452613514; Fri, 04 May 2018 09:50:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ?IPv6:2620:101:80fc:224:bdfe:eedf:56fb:d0e7? ([2620:101:80fc:224:bdfe:eedf:56fb:d0e7]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id d19sm37969251pfk.59.2018.05.04.09.50.11 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 04 May 2018 09:50:12 -0700 (PDT)
From: Nils Ohlmeier <nohlmeier@mozilla.com>
Message-Id: <574256E1-7AF4-4E25-9462-04B4B599C801@mozilla.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_B304B97A-2305-473C-A4A6-30895C272AEE"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha512"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.3 \(3445.6.18\))
Date: Fri, 04 May 2018 09:50:09 -0700
In-Reply-To: <0E876BDE-C438-43AD-B87A-95894ADCBF8F@sn3rd.com>
Cc: RTCWeb IETF <rtcweb@ietf.org>, Justin Uberti <juberti=40google.com@dmarc.ietf.org>
To: Sean Turner <sean@sn3rd.com>
References: <1D5B431C-801E-4F8C-8026-6BCBB72FF478@sn3rd.com> <F9EB7388-9E76-43E0-8C9B-61D3E50357F7@mozilla.com> <CAOJ7v-38kH4peZVVJU8itve2P+93eGaVdJ60MVcaRo3Xu86uTQ@mail.gmail.com> <296F0D20-F716-4C6C-8ABB-9FC21FC8189D@mozilla.com> <CAOJ7v-3wBVdfacAvb=VOggMXWMD1-5Oq-GCb5cNSCy3_-ur3Gw@mail.gmail.com> <A58B5A3B-DF5E-484B-ADD5-EBA539D0F250@iii.ca> <CAOJ7v-3FbN7v00Lzc5kJV4Nsw5DD0c6zLDLY+x1AgSOEHSt_WA@mail.gmail.com> <D6DEE1F6-A105-4095-902D-CB6F5AA2D937@mozilla.com> <CAOJ7v-2aXsQrwJ77+MsZ0cw-cx=VJTccFJwc9rxSFjdd+bCs-g@mail.gmail.com> <0E876BDE-C438-43AD-B87A-95894ADCBF8F@sn3rd.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.6.18)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtcweb/UhPTR16k2BTmK4pa25jehRO4lps>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Nils comments [Was: WGLC for draft-ietf-rtcweb-ip-handling]
X-BeenThere: rtcweb@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Fri, 04 May 2018 16:50:22 -0000

Created https://github.com/juberti/draughts/pull/101 <https://github.com/juberti/draughts/pull/101>

  Nils

> On May 4, 2018, at 08:26, Sean Turner <sean@sn3rd.com> wrote:
> 
> Repo is here :)
> 
> https://github.com/juberti/draughts
> 
> spt
> 
>> On May 1, 2018, at 17:33, Justin Uberti <juberti=40google.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
>> 
>> Do you want to take a shot at the text? (either in email or as a PR)
>> 
>> On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 3:21 PM Nils Ohlmeier <nohlmeier@mozilla.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> On Apr 30, 2018, at 15:03, Justin Uberti <juberti@google.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Any TURN server provided by the browser is in effect a proxy, and forcing use of said proxy can be done either through firewall config or explicit selection of Mode 4. (IOW, no new mode is needed.)
>> 
>> I do agree that these two configurations result in a similar behavior.
>> But I doubt that these use the same code path in implementations.
>> And (thus) I doubt readers of the draft/RFC will automatically come to the same conclusion.
>> 
>> It think it might be helpful to add another sentence explaining this scenario.
>> 
>>> The document originally pointed at RETURN as an example of how such TURN proxying could work, but was removed in order to avoid a dependency.
>> 
>> Fair enough.
>> 
>>  Nils
>> 
>>> On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 11:22 AM Cullen Jennings <fluffy@iii.ca> wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On Apr 17, 2018, at 3:15 AM, Justin Uberti <juberti=40google.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> IMO "trusting the TURN relay but not the application" is not a significant enough benefit to merit adding specific functionality for.
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> In the case were the TURN server is provided by the JS, I agree. But in the case where the configuration of the browser provided the TURN server, then I think it is as trusted as say a VPN server.
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> rtcweb mailing list
>> rtcweb@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email