Re: [rtcweb] Feedback for draft-ietf-rtcweb-mdns-ice-candidates-03

Justin Uberti <juberti@google.com> Tue, 09 July 2019 00:08 UTC

Return-Path: <juberti@google.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 9ADEA12039E for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 8 Jul 2019 17:08:58 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -16.204
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-16.204 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, ENV_AND_HDR_SPF_MATCH=-0.5, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, PDS_NO_HELO_DNS=1.295, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5, USER_IN_DEF_SPF_WL=-7.5] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=google.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 t7V2Vty137UP for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 8 Jul 2019 17:08:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-vs1-xe33.google.com (mail-vs1-xe33.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::e33]) (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 39874120399 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Mon, 8 Jul 2019 17:08:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-vs1-xe33.google.com with SMTP id v129so9471036vsb.11 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Mon, 08 Jul 2019 17:08:56 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=JetYU/DQqWzQSJkfOSPpxAx9xuC29GWDZkvKPt4jNCQ=; b=ka+r+Hl35jJyYm3FMlceXTyqqsUebF8sURezTTXmpojXtGA6107jiKKx/CEhy7/yZ4 Jc5SczeTa1TI7KumFketYwLikfnmwC32ZfJ41W5mSWGBVxtJmVA+V5ScKyw2N7vEvMik nxBNOK1b2QQ0n/r/U0mmqXWk/GGTSeb06jH7LSiSBfKe2tsnFAVt7khNTIphGQ8kbHKO BYNSXkq07pHo3MAqwwkmyztDszizVG7AldCPocaVTbDPGpGTuGahpBjTa1bsdpWvXDne bnULGBNjhxaUK2aEoZfl9W0RFeuuVsQwDQWTRwkoZxwTjDUp5bQhGeMPUHUDvHU86b/c jj8w==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=JetYU/DQqWzQSJkfOSPpxAx9xuC29GWDZkvKPt4jNCQ=; b=L1/XI8+L1Ir6EuKpElCPCBjFtNnmP9kUxcH9rkAMxwJh1TYVuVLu8H/BSebKze9ALj iUEqYbwboPiWT+L1ANONPZ1AM6rx8AvugkRhjtHA4Jq3IK81qKH7scJ8CY42iuWC2ZYd bG/ADCLrV1M3J3UHyalklz8EJ86Ak5AlddEGetALrSyWGsuQkPuyAtGH0V2V9HouOcmP sizyx0TdoJJ1+pIqz96yNBjYBlRCa9SF1XbX6lxVKzAUSQn8psz5r4zIVH1FziHTgNB/ Dn3dOHphBg9FVnLejjwvvv4p95T/NmvMfZeHi6oyS/TeFlQwSzsIQljnby4/o/t/EKjT cwhw==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXq/cKt2Ha82cp8vKpC1l8Zy+gYztzu21tVqtrs/Nv+4hwiPuG5 TcNcrOj9dLRMEZxDm2XJJ8Xn+KNaGrxYyCtKVWHt6w==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwy1/XqHfB5qKpw7/UtoyB8484a7ACZ2/rOzQt89bJQpWWovhBqWt3LZfKcns99XuJVeTVXDnm6/epVIzNzQDo=
X-Received: by 2002:a67:fd88:: with SMTP id k8mr12497610vsq.41.1562630934865; Mon, 08 Jul 2019 17:08:54 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <29062AF1-579F-41F2-A2A6-633E4371BF1E@mozilla.com> <CAD5OKxuCj8cbU5X+9xb5_xDC4VR6qYSuvwwNoKvSYxJHxeeN0g@mail.gmail.com> <C4EF9E8D-6A7A-40DF-82ED-0E4CB1D028EC@mozilla.com>
In-Reply-To: <C4EF9E8D-6A7A-40DF-82ED-0E4CB1D028EC@mozilla.com>
From: Justin Uberti <juberti@google.com>
Date: Mon, 8 Jul 2019 17:08:43 -0700
Message-ID: <CAOJ7v-3b5V7kCq5pS_0HLnx_UMTiRtkp3P3QVKVMz5qqhiEaiA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Nils Ohlmeier <nohlmeier@mozilla.com>
Cc: Roman Shpount <roman@telurix.com>, "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000ca365d058d345de9"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtcweb/dQlyGEPRq4D1JgS4lgnIXUsktn4>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Feedback for draft-ietf-rtcweb-mdns-ice-candidates-03
X-BeenThere: rtcweb@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Tue, 09 Jul 2019 00:09:10 -0000

The FQDN seemed like the most straightforward option, since nothing new
needed to be invented.

It's now apparent that that might have been overly optimistic, and we're
open to workarounds that are tolerated better and don't create issues of
their own.

On Mon, Jul 8, 2019 at 5:02 PM Nils Ohlmeier <nohlmeier@mozilla.com> wrote:

> Hi Roman,
>
> I know that not being able to handle FQDN in c-lines is a bug on the
> Firefox side.
> And we are working on it to fix it:
> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1544770
>
> But my main question is: why does the draft right now recommend to use the
> mDNS FQDN in the c-line, rather then a fake IPv4/IPv6 address?
> I fail to see the advantage of using the FQDN and it appears to cause more
> interop issues.
>
> Best
>   Nils Ohlmeier
>
> On 4Jul, 2019, at 12:26, Roman Shpount <roman@telurix.com> wrote:
>
> Nils,
>
> When writing ice-sip-sdp we have considered two possible options when
> using FQDN in ICE candidate lines:
>
> 1. Same FQDN as in default ICE candidate
> 2. IPv4/IPv6 address values "0.0.0.0"/"::" and port value of "9"
>
> To deal with both, ice-sip-sdp specifies, that when verifying ICE support,
> both options should be accepted.
>
> Since RFC 5245 provided no guidance regarding handling FQDN in default
> candidate, both options would likely cause ICE support verification
> failures. Using FQDN in default candidate also raised the question of
> address family and address type in c= line since neither is specified in
> the ICE candidate.
>
> This being said, FQDN in c= line is allowed by RFC 4566:
>
> connection-field =    [%x63 "=" nettype SP addrtype SP
>                          connection-address CRLF]
>                          ;a connection field must be present
>                          ;in every media description or at the
>                          ;session-level
>
> ; sub-rules of 'c='
> connection-address =  multicast-address / unicast-address
> unicast-address =     IP4-address / IP6-address / FQDN / extn-addr
>
> Not being able to handle FQDN in the c= line is technically a bug.
>
> Best Regards,
> _____________
> Roman Shpount
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 4, 2019 at 1:26 AM Nils Ohlmeier <nohlmeier@mozilla.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> I have concerns regarding the current recommendations in
>> draft-ietf-rtcweb-mdns-ice-candidates-03 regarding the handling of IP
>> addresses in the “c=“ lines.
>>
>> Section 3.1.2.3 recommends to use mDNS for the connection-address. I
>> think we should reconsider this advice as some SPD parsers handle parsing
>> failures differently depending on line type.
>> In case of Firefox a parsing failure for the connection line is treated
>> as terminal failure. Where parsing failures for a= lines are expected, as
>> these might contain unknown new features.
>>
>> Section 4.3 mentions that hostnames in ICE candidates can result in ICE
>> failures, but it does not cover backward compatibility in regards to the c=
>> line.
>>
>> My recommendation is to change the draft so that it recommends to always
>> use a fixed value, for example IP6 ::1 in all c= lines, if mDNS is in use.
>> Obviously it could also be recommended to use an IP4 address instead. The
>> important point is only to use the same IP consistently in all c= lines and
>> across all instances.
>> I think the advantage of this is better backwards compatibility, and it
>> will not reveal any more details about the user agent compared to using
>> mDNS names in c= lines.
>>
>> Best regards
>>   Nils Ohlmeier
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>