Re: [rtcweb] FW: I-D Action: draft-hutton-rtcweb-nat-firewall-considerations-00.txt

On 03/11/2013 06:04 PM, Reinaldo Penno (repenno) wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Why not use Port Control Protocol (PCP) to control Firewalls and NATs
> explicitly?
We can switch to that as soon as 100% of firewalls support it - until 
then, we have to be able to rely on other techniques.

That's the deployment problem in a nutshell... I don't understand how 
the first firewall gets an advantage from having PCP, given that none of 
the apps support it, and I don't understand how the first app gets an 
advantage from having PCP, given that no firewalls support it.

If PCP succeeds despite my misgivings, we can certainly revisit the issue.

>
> Thanks,
>
> On 3/11/13 9:56 AM, "Hutton, Andrew"
> <andrew.hutton@siemens-enterprise.com> wrote:
>
>> FYI - We submitted this draft today it relates to the requirements in the
>> use case draft for rtcweb to work in the presence of firewalls and http
>> proxies etc.
>>
>> Look forward to feedback and hope that this can be considered for
>> adoption by the working group.
>>
>> Regards
>> Andy
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: i-d-announce-bounces@ietf.org
>> [mailto:i-d-announce-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
>> internet-drafts@ietf.org
>> Sent: 11 March 2013 06:01
>> To: i-d-announce@ietf.org
>> Subject: I-D Action:
>> draft-hutton-rtcweb-nat-firewall-considerations-00.txt
>>
>>
>> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts
>> directories.
>>
>>
>> 	Title           : RTCWEB Considerations for NATs, Firewalls and HTTP
>> proxies
>> 	Author(s)       : Thomas Stach
>>                           Andrew Hutton
>>                           Justin Uberti
>> 	Filename        : draft-hutton-rtcweb-nat-firewall-considerations-00.txt
>> 	Pages           : 8
>> 	Date            : 2013-03-11
>>
>> Abstract:
>>    This document describes mechanism to enable media stream
>>    establishment in the presence of NATs, firewalls and HTTP proxies.
>>    HTTP proxy and firewall policies applied in many private network
>>    domains introduce obstacles to the successful establishment of media
>>    stream via RTCWEB.  This document examines some of these policies and
>>    develops requirements on the web browsers designed to provide the
>>    best possible chance of media connectivity between RTCWEB peers.
>>
>>
>> The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-hutton-rtcweb-nat-firewall-consider
>> ations
>>
>> There's also a htmlized version available at:
>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-hutton-rtcweb-nat-firewall-considerations
>> -00
>>
>>
>> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
>> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> I-D-Announce mailing list
>> I-D-Announce@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce
>> Internet-Draft directories: http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html
>> or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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