Re: [rtcweb] Transports: RFC 6062 support

Justin Uberti <juberti@google.com> Wed, 05 March 2014 15:32 UTC

Return-Path: <juberti@google.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 079841A0119 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Mar 2014 07:32:00 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.925
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.925 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.547, 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 oQNGnhINv_MP for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Mar 2014 07:31:54 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-vc0-x229.google.com (mail-vc0-x229.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400c:c03::229]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6773C1A0310 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Wed, 5 Mar 2014 07:31:54 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-vc0-f169.google.com with SMTP id hq11so1212227vcb.0 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Wed, 05 Mar 2014 07:31:50 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=ZHbHa4p9jUdje0tN9GPgrvx9FdtP2S2vaiOD2R6izN8=; b=GSgKkiKByp2APtTwMxdAvPxniJ4tyRtjFOn7X2Pi4QuNu7sL2Gsb6bcrna7ymEY5JN UucqfIdxylVbfioLxq9k5p65ljandfaiyyoRJ3zrQ6h/uY+qpI37twmNt86iGDxHSjY8 gbxG+xjBHGeCnxBKLuUx9y0z5bcTmn+UljXoUQ6NjFOdx6UTPJJeSlm8+rZN6IWbzt5Z 0FePeH25adJGd3AOTeELvmCeEY4ptxfO7hZxDginFlHoxzKiRDi3A6CqatmqnQlwqCbH aXrPmPyrQ+eK1bQCeEeHR04a/yAI5LnbdkGyXL02xNGqlDnew4rUo9gMts1PP/WS1oYt 9Y9w==
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=ZHbHa4p9jUdje0tN9GPgrvx9FdtP2S2vaiOD2R6izN8=; b=Rljzmt9J7byB37DKghTHdhA6ZqZePI3ryNAr336T2iFYzqPv938seVso7IqANRk08h 1afMHfuTJMuWufiVWFlsQc98qX1s5IeNyDrS58Ta4SnOHdkVB+4/wdvMsFPg2C9kLReo hCUtX3Sd7baOPMdF1vo5cUYj1Dex7u9qzJn6RJYloHNw9lBw6sQW9Fs/Sfx+1VeJOy7i TDh9A0hqQEBdl6PwBFQ06QFxlu5Mcvdyv4lGzBG0ddhb4OAs9qFuS5ZWV2qEeJYEsMAP E19tK6p8pAQGPDJvEebJWLrdgQw1yNH5EMYgMfMHrUEWJp5HLWSrkHyrJx9we5xRl+cB +L9Q==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmrs921LEh0lLEsqmTpTps6OZ5mZnj0BbYCq/jHIck/WocboYlzOfuzBizwCLKRtJT0GWdc1zSr7H4KbJJwaknGL71Fq8Miy9rTWL9x8GaKFC+uJcok/9zNwDadDwjyAK35LUwPGvs4VOIrJTfnXg98uaHMQZVppUbu8reu32m7nuIaaEwwfB8o7WiWAOzkmT7yY3tI
X-Received: by 10.221.74.65 with SMTP id yv1mr458683vcb.31.1394033510626; Wed, 05 Mar 2014 07:31:50 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.52.26.43 with HTTP; Wed, 5 Mar 2014 07:31:30 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CABAmMA00xA1TbXsQRYYnuukYyurZzdG8nKr95aT4gxHxQtNiMw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAOJ7v-0-U8ycUYcOwRGxgZVDQmdPMXC4Qt7F+uAn29AGOepX7w@mail.gmail.com> <CABAmMA00xA1TbXsQRYYnuukYyurZzdG8nKr95aT4gxHxQtNiMw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Justin Uberti <juberti@google.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2014 15:31:30 +0000
Message-ID: <CAOJ7v-0xiG-omwmpXm9koakab+EDFo7W=gW+WY4fGS6QVKfALQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Gil Zino <gilzino@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1136563834ce1504f3ddb8d9
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtcweb/_jJyLX6Pj0h6x5bZZ_gB1qYHBuc
Cc: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Transports: RFC 6062 support
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: Wed, 05 Mar 2014 15:32:00 -0000

I am assuming 3% as the case where TCP is needed to get through
UDP-blocking firewalls, based on empirical data from QUIC testing in Chrome
over a very large population.

Since TURN TCP candidates (not to be confused with TURN/TCP to connect to
the TURN server) are only useful in the case where BOTH sides are behind
such firewalls, 3% * 3% == .09% is the fraction of calls where TURN TCP
candidates are useful. As an optimization, I don't think this is worth
worrying about.


On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 3:26 PM, Gil Zino <gilzino@gmail.com> wrote:

> Agree on the cost concern.  Not sure I fully understand the context
> though.  Is ~.09% the estimated percentage of times that TCP will be the
> only way to get through UDP-blocking firewalls, or am I mis-understanding
> the use case?
>
> If it does refer to the UDP-blocking, what data is it based on?  I do know
> large enterprise firewalls skew significantly higher on UDP blocking, but I
> suspect SMB and residential perhaps are more UDP-permissive by default (but
> have never seen extensive data that is not biased by the sampling).
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 10:02 AM, Justin Uberti <juberti@google.com> wrote:
>
>> From the transports draft, Section 3.4:
>>
>>
>>    TURN TCP candidates [RFC6062 <http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6062>] SHOULD be supported; this allows
>>    applications to achieve peer-to-peer communication when both parties
>>    are behind UDP-blocking firewalls using a single TURN server.  (In
>>    this case, one can also achieve communication using two TURN servers
>>    that use TCP between the server and the client, and UDP between the
>>    TURN servers.)
>>
>>
>> I don't think we want to do this. The optimization of having a single vs two TURN servers in the .09% case is not worth the implementation or runtime cost of allocating TURN TCP candidates. It requires a TCP connection to the TURN server, which we would otherwise not do except in fallback cases.
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> rtcweb mailing list
>> rtcweb@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb
>>
>>
>