IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] rtcweb-transports reference to TRAM discovery

Justin Uberti <juberti@google.com> Tue, 16 December 2014 17:40 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 704F21A701D for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 09:40:42 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.088
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.088 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, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=no
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 Ha_mPS2WJ03l for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 09:40:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-vc0-x22f.google.com (mail-vc0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400c:c03::22f]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0B5951A701A for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 09:40:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-vc0-f175.google.com with SMTP id hy10so6665228vcb.34 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 09:40:39 -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=HswboJgASv6fUuAZ94MtJPzfb8E8Keic7oQ3SPgBBsM=; b=KN9UP42o7eK7IOcB0cexT06lQP5c8yHiRGIdrJ+KuFtRP9bKM5E3qEe7jW23i80n/8 oCGD8VVWt1161C0l/HolfFyQMt12HWpecBwTo4ALSNtOcvaWY/eCeMTYXnP7QYqzUCqu Fk4k77k3hQXNGiA13bFs+/3mBPp4NzXLG7aHednqGRSYgCXNG7Jy0ajlN3aA0P1smdRy Eqx3tTJGsNjyXzsx2eNfV8Ad4psFLUwFJbKn8+v0C1A2HbsjGCGDgST/qU1DU/b3rfbO LHY20LfXp4QFDpcNd3rPjGmNnTlgf5LupHYFCXwXgAx93pnEYlJ07zs+uLjB6Wxf5a0x IfhQ==
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=HswboJgASv6fUuAZ94MtJPzfb8E8Keic7oQ3SPgBBsM=; b=YxRT7KXTlKeVPrRO6iF5MrZZwW4tbDrI5EVrAf1xKI2w6kiD/WYoDqNvaKKJfBs4LG uf8fsQihjhDvAB4j1/6EsA98u7hVty0/Oj7KZDGkY87SxCkOVm8TbcQ2qZjGSfsAZ4WQ zc/+sjyFGXiYW3l1OEeEh3rHRNuIPPa/LO+cG6GiKryhoU1P+cUS0HGZsiwa0/rLmR1U 8WyWb6EnRre9/oWatc4S2KeixZHyzqOpCp1wixRUx9VxOUIBLA3Gi9jdGAIOf79pHSYj rcGdqVTz1v5B9mSoGjjshALgdYcvdhaDNr2Y5csOUFY2ElhS2h149D8oHN/jLwlWSAsK aw3g==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlsFME4GtGzDnESk2upsoh6zEclZQE4MejhnEyKpGakwUlY4qMyDcZz5U8V8m1WYPGlZeqI
X-Received: by 10.53.1.134 with SMTP id bg6mr19603484vdd.37.1418751639111; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 09:40:39 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.52.10.229 with HTTP; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 09:40:18 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <FAA9B38F-1AB8-4E2C-AB02-2525402B4890@cisco.com>
References: <9F33F40F6F2CD847824537F3C4E37DDF1E63FB08@MCHP04MSX.global-ad.net> <CABcZeBOpX0vM9NJeKY5e+S13oKrLW3Td53qcxRkCHa2=nv=EGg@mail.gmail.com> <CANO7kWBY1MTU1A2fWo0E5Y6TQ1o+vWSz22pnWz6+5s7SFQcP-g@mail.gmail.com> <9F33F40F6F2CD847824537F3C4E37DDF1E63FD67@MCHP04MSX.global-ad.net> <FAA9B38F-1AB8-4E2C-AB02-2525402B4890@cisco.com>
From: Justin Uberti <juberti@google.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2014 09:40:18 -0800
Message-ID: <CAOJ7v-3xxVa05kA0SYVYQO324AwLWGUo8f_u534fN_-De0AV4A@mail.gmail.com>
To: 🔓Dan Wing <dwing@cisco.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a1135f22c796cee050a58db00"
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtcweb/i2EDTUhnV1HDevC-RpEH9BBhmmk
Cc: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] rtcweb-transports reference to TRAM discovery
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: Tue, 16 Dec 2014 17:40:42 -0000

Given that TURN servers can be used for STUN, is there a need to
autodiscover STUN-only servers?

On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 5:23 PM, 🔓Dan Wing <dwing@cisco.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Dec 15, 2014, at 7:56 AM, Hutton, Andrew <andrew.hutton@unify.com>
> wrote:
>
> +1 Also wondering why it is not appropriate?
>
> F20 in the requirements draft states:
>
> F20     The browser must support the use of STUN and TURN
>            servers that are supplied by entities other than
>            the web application (i.e. the network provider).
>
> So I was thinking the need for specifying the discovery method would not
> be controversial.
>
>
> Note that draft-ietf-tram-turn-server-discovery only discovers TURN
> servers.  If we need to discover STUN servers, too -- and I think we do --
> we need that document to expand its scope or a second document.
>
> I recently attended a talk where Matt Peterson presented Burning Man's
> network.  That network assigns RFC6598 addresses to each Burning Man
> "camp", and their ISP provides CGN'd addresses to Burning Man.  Each camp
> operates its own WiFi network, and we can all reasonably assume they are
> using typical consumer or SMB NAPT devices for those networks (e.g.,
> D-Link, Linksys, Ubiquity, etc.).  To avoid tromboning camp-to-camp WebRTC
> traffic to their ISP's CGN, they would benefit from a STUN and a TURN
> server within the Burning Man network.  His presentation can be found at
> https://www.nanog.org/meetings/nanog62/agenda (PDF and video).
>
> -d
>
>
>
> Andy
>
>
> *From:* Simon Perreault [mailto:sperreault@jive.com <sperreault@jive.com>]
>
> *Sent:* 15 December 2014 15:49
> *To:* Eric Rescorla
> *Cc:* Hutton, Andrew; rtcweb@ietf.org
> *Subject:* Re: [rtcweb] rtcweb-transports reference to TRAM discovery
>
>
> On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 10:44 AM, Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com> wrote:
> I do not believe that this is an appropriate requirement
>
> Care to say why?
>
> Thanks,
> Simon
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
>

v2.31.3 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status