Re: [rtcweb] Transports: RFC 4941 support?

Justin Uberti <juberti@google.com> Fri, 21 March 2014 04:13 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 832BE1A091C for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 20 Mar 2014 21:13:31 -0700 (PDT)
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 5efqbe0STcWQ for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 20 Mar 2014 21:13:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-vc0-x233.google.com (mail-vc0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400c:c03::233]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 769591A07FF for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 20 Mar 2014 21:13:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-vc0-f179.google.com with SMTP id ij19so2077554vcb.10 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 20 Mar 2014 21:13:20 -0700 (PDT)
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=ifYdx3vBhoCPac79WsLyaLLkmiiZ9eSTHknTCmQQZhU=; b=M4dXkrBqP0TlDMPTYu2xhq+msiQu+VVzcLiSQs+mXxIuhqe1rkzON39w1mQqoG9Myg ZwK0EOsRymEdC99GBSNA+TPC0SXeMjBXFA48Ptn+qMQngjYNfjscN3FpdnW/kxAp5ekY g5Z07CXqfHeXDqwp7l7UJDWUEwDiWftomUU/ZUsv3gIje8QD3xQR+heWyEp4gvN647xu 0Og+06LH9QtXczQUPlov2+eLoe42KU93cN+wZFhe3+j8xetcBCrSE25eKPSA7tZwdVe1 mavYTVrn68xt+ItnkyNg1yk5pzt6pwGPTehwfpdIdOlyMnjj+joiLnMYv5ASSOZolgLX PKSg==
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=ifYdx3vBhoCPac79WsLyaLLkmiiZ9eSTHknTCmQQZhU=; b=JPoOJaB3kGEl19g7nwYGqf3wJvAC3XY/O58LIGc1QsFTcj446DfjeNbpDQ+a+XoOHQ 02L4ldjo00iZrKJDWYcV2Pn4+rXUVX5o0Sdc+QLwvwfgyM0LbP8ADRdCPltrW4X5W5hS Aotugbh218Xt85EwVkEmt2DUlBJBaQoEDpxnadooJuVExad360AJlj+nNADLtyeQSkND YcgLOxCmALwqGj3S0Dfz11AaYfVEajznERhwGxaB8KxJhcVlLuMPZgrqW7xaXjM6f8ea WZJDp73uOVMEwFuQ7LKbEnmwCy3CpiRpFWeIA8GPzd8iUzc8buBcj+UJaGzsF7QuyXSU kP4A==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQknlQ9kginYhdBvJSkYd1PWFYFHm5N23cZyK9I8igTWOimh6xg43ZK5o5mFw5Q3gs891QLh/+Vx2RkMbs0uO44nq7bEZtpyblR0dF/dyiJx4i47Qgeq05Os6oXmN9LOTbU4XLtB5hi1fSdHqWAZIXNueLvXWi9de8Klq7Q+5laQQlj9Q9yhtpsYAu+S8uHEikH6cFfl
X-Received: by 10.58.161.101 with SMTP id xr5mr5990620veb.36.1395375199900; Thu, 20 Mar 2014 21:13:19 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.52.26.43 with HTTP; Thu, 20 Mar 2014 21:12:59 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAD5OKxv5xHknbsPCYpysvo7CeA7oKFu+Yy7QJbmVd6s1UyLr7A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAOJ7v-0Hw0NFs_avsB2Z8do21BCws2LRZSeSh6HP0t455SPXyw@mail.gmail.com> <B6836FFA-867A-4CBF-9855-D265425EC5E1@cisco.com> <CAOqqYVE=i2L7FxGgKuV0DVaaxYOPnxzSEbDoq0_4Tqapna575g@mail.gmail.com> <CD747481-EBDA-4FFC-A31D-618E6E217420@cisco.com> <5329B617.2070001@alvestrand.no> <17885A74-50A3-49E3-8C54-E53C55019C73@cisco.com> <CAOJ7v-0Dx4Owam7NzXqs6ALPi+ps9gKbmFK9=Zu5eBr9yHYgKg@mail.gmail.com> <444DE75E-BF07-4C6F-91B1-CF57DC67FBA3@cisco.com> <CA+9kkMD5jG-w7ahHLsUX9QMSkSMArS4Wz7ZYOucAZWkrmz5YsQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAOJ7v-1JZG547KkiWeG=3zfCFk6WVzm+r9kF0MTg3SQynHMJdg@mail.gmail.com> <CAD5OKxvKJRMYGYDRNKvmdxmsc35B16P4-+73E+o85-re42yrzw@mail.gmail.com> <CAOJ7v-2hMHJUGhKKocvu5Ld9_cr+duSbJ=+rEucUaAmjiooZTA@mail.gmail.com> <CAD5OKxv5xHknbsPCYpysvo7CeA7oKFu+Yy7QJbmVd6s1UyLr7A@mail.gmail.com>
From: Justin Uberti <juberti@google.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2014 21:12:59 -0700
Message-ID: <CAOJ7v-0PKuFqZNb6JKAXGD56ngo8QT7tgJQxV2RK0d5TR8yNWA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Roman Shpount <roman@telurix.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b5d5b0a1e72c904f5161b48
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtcweb/tR4kINS-lZyooxj0ESQrn_0-PU0
Cc: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Transports: RFC 4941 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: Fri, 21 Mar 2014 04:13:31 -0000

OK. Perhaps the guidance should be that if an interface has a temporary and
a non-temporary address, only the temporary one should be gathered. This
avoids any problems if local policy chooses not to use temporary addresses.

FWIW, I have seen this setup where a client has both non-temporary and
temporary addresses in the wild, so this is a real-world problem.


On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 7:39 PM, Roman Shpount <roman@telurix.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 8:28 PM, Justin Uberti <juberti@google.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 4:17 PM, Roman Shpount <roman@telurix.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 7:03 PM, Justin Uberti <juberti@google.com>wrote;wrote:
>>>
>>>> Your take is what I had in mind. Basically a ruleset like this:
>>>>
>>>>  gather_ipv4_addresses();
>>>>  if (has_ipv6) {
>>>>   if (has_temporary_addresses && temporaries_not_forbidden_by_policy) {
>>>>     gather_temporary_ipv6_addresses();
>>>>   } else {
>>>>     gather_non_temporary_ipv6_addresses();
>>>>  }
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>>
>>>  What should be done when temporary enabled only on some of the network
>>> interfaces of the device, i.e. if, for instance, WiFI interface has only
>>> non temp ipv6 address and LTE has both temp and permanent address present?
>>>
>>>
>> Is this a real-world problem? As I understand it, temporary addresses are
>> assigned by the host, so you either support them or you don't.
>>
>
> On Linux you can enable temporary addresses per interface, so it is
> possible.
>
> The whole problem (with using temp or permanent addresses) is a bit
> imaginary since under most common client setups you only see temporary
> addresses. Permanent IPv6 addresses show up only on servers or if
> specifically configured on the host.
> _____________
> Roman Shpount
>
>