Re: [rtcweb] [BEHAVE] Why? Quality! New Version Notification for draft-chenxin-behave-turn-websocket-00.txt
"Hutton, Andrew" <andrew.hutton@siemens-enterprise.com> Thu, 23 May 2013 13:09 UTC
Return-Path: <andrew.hutton@siemens-enterprise.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 2298421F93B1; Thu, 23 May 2013 06:09:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.787
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.787 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.578, BAYES_00=-2.599, PLING_QUERY=1.39]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id HuWam1ftClVd; Thu, 23 May 2013 06:08:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from senmx11-mx.siemens-enterprise.com (senmx11-mx.siemens-enterprise.com [62.134.46.9]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 421F121F93BC; Thu, 23 May 2013 06:08:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from MCHP02HTC.global-ad.net (unknown [172.29.42.235]) by senmx11-mx.siemens-enterprise.com (Server) with ESMTP id 481C41EB8648; Thu, 23 May 2013 15:08:54 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from MCHP04MSX.global-ad.net ([169.254.1.159]) by MCHP02HTC.global-ad.net ([172.29.42.235]) with mapi id 14.02.0328.009; Thu, 23 May 2013 15:08:54 +0200
From: "Hutton, Andrew" <andrew.hutton@siemens-enterprise.com>
To: Simon Perreault <simon.perreault@viagenie.ca>, Karl Stahl <karl.stahl@intertex.se>
Thread-Topic: [BEHAVE] [rtcweb] Why? Quality! New Version Notification for draft-chenxin-behave-turn-websocket-00.txt
Thread-Index: AQHOVs8PvK/QKOM3AUmVgv4HMJ4KjZkSvTfQ
Date: Thu, 23 May 2013 13:08:53 +0000
Message-ID: <9F33F40F6F2CD847824537F3C4E37DDF115A0F16@MCHP04MSX.global-ad.net>
References: <9E34D50A21D1D1489134B4D770CE03974C6DC83A@szxeml538-mbs.china.huawei.com> <9F33F40F6F2CD847824537F3C4E37DDF11599668@MCHP04MSX.global-ad.net> <BLU169-W4995BC8B88C6AD60F4CA5093A20@phx.gbl> <9F33F40F6F2CD847824537F3C4E37DDF1159A209@MCHP04MSX.global-ad.net> <6F6B2040-A8C7-4B37-928E-5072F06E9894@tokbox.com> <20130520111522.1b7e2eb1@meetecho.com> <9F33F40F6F2CD847824537F3C4E37DDF1159CF9B@MCHP04MSX.global-ad.net> <3094D7F4-1DBE-4557-8815-3067AE07E219@unina.it> <9F33F40F6F2CD847824537F3C4E37DDF1159E317@MCHP04MSX.global-ad.net> <000001ce5677$4b471650$e1d542f0$@stahl@intertex.se> <519C7B17.8070405@viagenie.ca> <005f01ce56cb$6acb47e0$4061d7a0$@stahl@intertex.se> <519C904B.2040305@viagenie.ca>
In-Reply-To: <519C904B.2040305@viagenie.ca>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [172.29.42.225]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "behave@ietf.org" <behave@ietf.org>, "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] [BEHAVE] Why? Quality! New Version Notification for draft-chenxin-behave-turn-websocket-00.txt
X-BeenThere: rtcweb@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: Thu, 23 May 2013 13:09:01 -0000
At least with regard to draft-hutton-rtcweb-nat-firewall-considerations we are not attempting to enter or add to any existing arms race between clients and firewalls. We are only describing how to use existing IETF protocols which already extensively discuss firewall traversal (E.g. TURN / RFC 5766) to meet the RTCWEB requirements in this area which have existed in http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-rtcweb-use-cases-and-requirements-10 for almost two years now. Of course if a network administer wants to block RTCWEB media they should be able to so and nobody is I believe suggesting that we try to prevent this. Regards Andy > -----Original Message----- > From: behave-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:behave-bounces@ietf.org] On > Behalf Of Simon Perreault > Sent: 22 May 2013 10:31 > To: Karl Stahl > Cc: rtcweb@ietf.org; behave@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [BEHAVE] [rtcweb] Why? Quality! New Version Notification > for draft-chenxin-behave-turn-websocket-00.txt > > Le 2013-05-22 11:04, Karl Stahl a écrit : > >> Firewall traversal is a completely different beast. > > > > Not really. There are always firewall functions included in "a NAT" > (e.g. > > open for traffic from inside to outside and you can then get traffic > back > > the same path - with some timeout), even if the RFCs only call the > box "a > > NAT". I prefer to say NAT/Firewall. > > You're focusing on the technical aspect. The difference I'm considering > is not technical. > > NAT traversal is performed with the agreement of everyone involved, > whereas firewall traversal is a battle between the client implementer > and the firewall administrator. There's also a potential arms race: > firewalls will evolve with the ability to block whatever we > standardize, > so we will need a newer traversal method, which firewalls will end up > blocking as well, etc. etc. etc. We don't want to play that game. > > NAT traversal: ok > Firewall traversal: not for the IETF > > Simon > _______________________________________________ > Behave mailing list > Behave@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/behave
- [rtcweb] FW: New Version Notification for draft-c… Chenxin (Xin)
- Re: [rtcweb] FW: New Version Notification for dra… Hutton, Andrew
- Re: [rtcweb] FW: New Version Notification for dra… Bernard Aboba
- Re: [rtcweb] FW: New Version Notification for dra… Tirumaleswar Reddy (tireddy)
- Re: [rtcweb] FW: New Version Notification for dra… Hutton, Andrew
- Re: [rtcweb] FW: New Version Notification for dra… Chenxin (Xin)
- Re: [rtcweb] FW: New Version Notification for dra… Chenxin (Xin)
- Re: [rtcweb] New Version Notification for draft-c… Gustavo García
- Re: [rtcweb] New Version Notification for draft-c… Lorenzo Miniero
- Re: [rtcweb] New Version Notification for draft-c… Hutton, Andrew
- Re: [rtcweb] New Version Notification for draft-c… Simon Pietro Romano
- Re: [rtcweb] New Version Notification for draft-c… Hutton, Andrew
- [rtcweb] Why? Quality! New Version Notification f… Karl Stahl
- Re: [rtcweb] [BEHAVE] Why? Quality! New Version N… Simon Perreault
- Re: [rtcweb] [BEHAVE] Why? Quality! New Version N… Karl Stahl
- Re: [rtcweb] [BEHAVE] Why? Quality! New Version N… Simon Perreault
- Re: [rtcweb] [BEHAVE] New Version Notification fo… Hutton, Andrew
- Re: [rtcweb] [BEHAVE] Why? Quality! New Version N… Hutton, Andrew
- Re: [rtcweb] [BEHAVE] Why? Quality! New Version N… Chenxin (Xin)
- Re: [rtcweb] [BEHAVE] Why? Quality! New Version N… Bernard Aboba
- Re: [rtcweb] [BEHAVE] Why? Quality! New Version N… Olle E. Johansson
- Re: [rtcweb] [BEHAVE] Why? Quality! New Version N… Karl Stahl
- Re: [rtcweb] [BEHAVE] Why? Quality! New Version N… Karl Stahl
- Re: [rtcweb] [BEHAVE] Why? Quality! New Version N… Karl Stahl
- Re: [rtcweb] [BEHAVE] Why? Quality! New Version N… Matthew Kaufman (SKYPE)
- Re: [rtcweb] [BEHAVE] Why? Quality! New Version N… Simon Perreault
- Re: [rtcweb] New Version Notification for draft-c… Marc Petit-Huguenin
- Re: [rtcweb] New Version Notification for draft-c… Richard Barnes