[rtcweb] TURN, NAT and Proxies
Binod <binod.pg@oracle.com> Mon, 11 March 2013 16:01 UTC
Return-Path: <binod.pg@oracle.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 F346011E8119 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 11 Mar 2013 09:01:11 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.69
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.69 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_ILLEGAL_IP=1.908, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
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 PVGk9VqaMRAD for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 11 Mar 2013 09:01:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from userp1040.oracle.com (userp1040.oracle.com [156.151.31.81]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 700BF11E80F0 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Mon, 11 Mar 2013 09:01:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from acsinet21.oracle.com (acsinet21.oracle.com [141.146.126.237]) by userp1040.oracle.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.3.1/Sentrion-MTA-4.3.1) with ESMTP id r2BG1AJU003164 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Mon, 11 Mar 2013 16:01:11 GMT
Received: from acsmt357.oracle.com (acsmt357.oracle.com [141.146.40.157]) by acsinet21.oracle.com (8.14.4+Sun/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r2BG19VD027939 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Mon, 11 Mar 2013 16:01:09 GMT
Received: from abhmt114.oracle.com (abhmt114.oracle.com [141.146.116.66]) by acsmt357.oracle.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id r2BG19qs008172 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Mon, 11 Mar 2013 11:01:09 -0500
Received: from [223.239.147.187] (/223.239.147.187) by default (Oracle Beehive Gateway v4.0) with ESMTP ; Mon, 11 Mar 2013 09:01:09 -0700
Message-ID: <513DFFC2.1000605@oracle.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2013 21:31:06 +0530
From: Binod <binod.pg@oracle.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130106 Thunderbird/17.0.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: rtcweb@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------070700030505050905030004"
X-Source-IP: acsinet21.oracle.com [141.146.126.237]
Subject: [rtcweb] TURN, NAT and Proxies
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: Mon, 11 Mar 2013 16:01:12 -0000
I was scanning the webrtc drafts to figure out what is specified regarding NAT traversal, firewall and proxies. draft-ietf-rtcweb-use-cases-and-requirements <http://tools.ietf.org/wg/rtcweb/draft-ietf-rtcweb-use-cases-and-requirements/> mentions 1) NAT/FW that blocks UDP : Ok, This is achieved by supporting ICE-TCP 2) FW that only allows http: How is this supported? What about enterprises that only support proxies? In the google group discussion, Justin was mentioning that browser could connect with a proxy (http connect) even for TURN traffic and also mentioned supporting an enterprise TURN server. Will this make into one of the webrtc rfcs? thanks, Binod.
- [rtcweb] TURN, NAT and Proxies Binod
- Re: [rtcweb] TURN, NAT and Proxies Lorenzo Miniero
- Re: [rtcweb] TURN, NAT and Proxies Hutton, Andrew