Re: [rtcweb] I-D Action: draft-ietf-rtcweb-stun-consent-freshness-10.txt

Christer Holmberg <> Mon, 15 December 2014 13:24 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 44D6B1A1BE7 for <>; Mon, 15 Dec 2014 05:24:40 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.201
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.201 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id HuKtZjfpVkfi for <>; Mon, 15 Dec 2014 05:24:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9446A1A1AA9 for <>; Mon, 15 Dec 2014 05:24:36 -0800 (PST)
X-AuditID: c1b4fb2d-f79fc6d000001087-60-548ee1126304
Received: from (Unknown_Domain []) by (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id F5.61.04231.211EE845; Mon, 15 Dec 2014 14:24:34 +0100 (CET)
Received: from ([]) by ([]) with mapi id 14.03.0195.001; Mon, 15 Dec 2014 14:24:34 +0100
From: Christer Holmberg <>
To: "" <>
Thread-Topic: [rtcweb] I-D Action: draft-ietf-rtcweb-stun-consent-freshness-10.txt
Thread-Index: AQHQGBlC0BiuLXvjskuFnB/jAs9l3ZyQonNA
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2014 13:24:33 +0000
Message-ID: <>
References: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFrrCLMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUyM+Jvja7Qw74Qg71L9CzW/mtnd2D0WLLk J1MAYxSXTUpqTmZZapG+XQJXxq6eNqaC6RIV//76NzC+Fupi5OSQEDCR6FvbwAJhi0lcuLee rYuRi0NI4AijxMYtJ6CcJYwSn49eB6ri4GATsJDo/qcN0iAioC5x+eEFdpCwsECwxNYjwRDh EImvv56yQdhGEk0nloLZLAKqEp/fLmQFKecV8JX4sckfJCwk4Cgxb/05JhCbU8BJ4vOSm+wg NiPQOd9PrQGLMwuIS9x6Mp8J4kwBiSV7zjND2KISLx//Y4WwlSR+bLjEAlGvI7Fg9yc2CFtb YtnC12D1vAKCEidnPmGZwCg6C8nYWUhaZiFpmYWkZQEjyypG0eLU4uLcdCNjvdSizOTi4vw8 vbzUkk2MwGg4uOW37g7G1a8dDzEKcDAq8fAWiPWFCLEmlhVX5h5ilOZgURLnXXRuXrCQQHpi SWp2ampBalF8UWlOavEhRiYOTqkGxjU5n+yy7AQm7NHhUazoOl+Vxf5613Wbs0ypqXss4iMa ir05Pzyyebpwj3dBucnr/CWrXLanKDkc3WvWIXGywLvKO01h8fuJPAfD5LQ5Lm3abrV49vnS i8X8fy6uffeC/3eyI2dEQ+nRhMlbjnP88kxpnuR448y3iU6fd0ez35iiX3par0QwWYmlOCPR UIu5qDgRAEf0Ov1nAgAA
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] I-D Action: draft-ietf-rtcweb-stun-consent-freshness-10.txt
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Real-Time Communication in WEB-browsers working group list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2014 13:24:40 -0000


Thank you very much for addressing my comments! :)

However, I still have an issue with the text saying:

  	"A WebRTC implementation [I-D.ietf-rtcweb-overview], which implements
   	full ICE, MUST perform consent freshness test using STUN request/
   	response as described below:"

First, I question whether this document should make normative requirements on WebRTC? Shouldn't some WebRTC document instead mandate the usage?

Second, what if a non-WebRTC implementation wants to use the mechanism? The procedures are described below the text above, so the way I read it they only apply to WebRTC implementations.

Third, *IF* the scope of the mechanism is only WebRTC (perhaps it is, and I have misunderstood), I think we need to have some explicit text indicating that.

Fourth, if you want to use terminology from [I-D.ietf-rtcweb-overview] you need to make sure it's aligned with that draft. I don't think "WebRTC implementation" exists in draft-rtcweb-overview-13, so you would have to define that as a browser, non-browser or compatible endpoint (or, use those terminologies).




-----Original Message-----
From: rtcweb [] On Behalf Of
Sent: 15. joulukuuta 2014 5:43
Subject: [rtcweb] I-D Action: draft-ietf-rtcweb-stun-consent-freshness-10.txt

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
 This draft is a work item of the Real-Time Communication in WEB-browsers Working Group of the IETF.

        Title           : STUN Usage for Consent Freshness
        Authors         : Muthu Arul Mozhi Perumal
                          Dan Wing
                          Ram Mohan Ravindranath
                          Tirumaleswar Reddy
                          Martin Thomson
	Filename        : draft-ietf-rtcweb-stun-consent-freshness-10.txt
	Pages           : 9
	Date            : 2014-12-14

   To prevent sending excessive traffic to an endpoint, periodic consent
   needs to be obtained from that remote endpoint.

   This document describes a consent mechanism using a new Session
   Traversal Utilities for NAT (STUN) usage.

The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:

There's also a htmlized version available at:

A diff from the previous version is available at:

Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:

rtcweb mailing list