IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] Query/Comment on draft-ietf-rtcweb-use-cases-and-requirements-12

Simon Perreault <simon.perreault@viagenie.ca> Fri, 24 January 2014 18:17 UTC

Return-Path: <simon.perreault@viagenie.ca>
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 A55571A013F for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 24 Jan 2014 10:17:42 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.436
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.436 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.535, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 Vfd2A3j5WW17 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 24 Jan 2014 10:17:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: from jazz.viagenie.ca (jazz.viagenie.ca [IPv6:2620:0:230:8000::2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D0BCD1A00DF for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Fri, 24 Jan 2014 10:17:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: from porto.nomis80.org (ringo.viagenie.ca [IPv6:2620:0:230:c000:3e97:eff:fe0b:dd8a]) by jazz.viagenie.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 76AC0403F8; Fri, 24 Jan 2014 13:17:39 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <52E2AE42.5060903@viagenie.ca>
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2014 13:17:38 -0500
From: Simon Perreault <simon.perreault@viagenie.ca>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Parthasarathi R <partha@parthasarathi.co.in>, rtcweb@ietf.org
References: <913383AAA69FF945B8F946018B75898A2428E32D@xmb-rcd-x10.cisco.com> <009601cf17ca$5723cb70$056b6250$@co.in> <1447FA0C20ED5147A1AA0EF02890A64B1CF32B82@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se> <004501cf18a1$913c4080$b3b4c180$@co.in> <52E27630.3030300@viagenie.ca> <001c01cf1920$a00c9220$e025b660$@co.in> <52E2952A.2010503@viagenie.ca> <002001cf1927$b502eb00$1f08c100$@co.in>
In-Reply-To: <002001cf1927$b502eb00$1f08c100$@co.in>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Query/Comment on draft-ietf-rtcweb-use-cases-and-requirements-12
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: Fri, 24 Jan 2014 18:17:42 -0000

Le 2014-01-24 12:14, Parthasarathi R a écrit :
> Please note that when non-IETFers read this requirement document, they come
> to the conclusion that IETF RTCWeb WG recommends TURN and not other
> mechanisms. I'm saying that requirement document should not be used as the
> mechanism to eliminate the other alternatives when there is a discussion
> going-on in PNTAW alias. So, I'm asking for the change.

I would totally agree with that sentiment, although I don't see your 
proposed text change reflecting it accurately. How about simply:

"Note that TURN support being mandatory does not preclude a WebRTC 
endpoint from supporting additional traversal mechanisms."

Simon
-- 
DTN made easy, lean, and smart --> http://postellation.viagenie.ca
NAT64/DNS64 open-source        --> http://ecdysis.viagenie.ca
STUN/TURN server               --> http://numb.viagenie.ca

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email