IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] [BEHAVE] URI schemes for TURN and STUN

Marc Petit-Huguenin <petithug@acm.org> Sat, 05 November 2011 15:45 UTC

Return-Path: <petithug@acm.org>
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 D3CF221F8770; Sat, 5 Nov 2011 08:45:11 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.677
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.677 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.077, BAYES_00=-2.599, NO_RELAYS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 mAX7TdgMvKEc; Sat, 5 Nov 2011 08:45:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from implementers.org (implementers.org [IPv6:2604:3400:dc1:41:216:3eff:fe5b:8240]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C4C7021F85EF; Sat, 5 Nov 2011 08:45:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [IPv6:2001:470:1f05:616:213:d4ff:fe04:3e08] (shalmaneser.org [IPv6:2001:470:1f05:616:213:d4ff:fe04:3e08]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "petithug", Issuer "implementers.org" (verified OK)) by implementers.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 71B10200D1; Sat, 5 Nov 2011 15:36:05 +0000 (UTC)
Message-ID: <4EB55A01.70900@acm.org>
Date: Sat, 05 Nov 2011 08:45:05 -0700
From: Marc Petit-Huguenin <petithug@acm.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.23) Gecko/20111010 Iceowl/1.0b2 Icedove/3.1.15
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Gonzalo Salgueiro <gsalguei@cisco.com>
References: <4EAC6BF4.2000604@alvestrand.no> <CALiegf=f4kFzyDLWK+Y5vbuCEJFXX590+VuZ4bbnHZnvX0CoBA@mail.gmail.com> <4EAC8AE0.3020307@acm.org> <4EACD558.1050003@alvestrand.no> <4EAE157F.5020901@it.aoyama.ac.jp> <4EAEB76B.9090304@acm.org> <8B0C4061-D362-4DFE-9677-7E64515A6E1C@network-heretics.com> <4EAF9391.5040209@it.aoyama.ac.jp> <4EB05A23.3060101@alvestrand.no> <01O80L7NM7N000RCTX@mauve.mrochek.com> <CABcZeBPCGcUcEDNJ5T3+LowrdTz-NAka3Q33CA8mvdwb0=+aZg@mail.gmail.com> <4EB480E7.1010200@alvestrand.no> <CABcZeBPba+PU5234jpHRYa0sfiwKVVFg6C-oGXBUEehvjrmpmw@mail.gmail.com> <48690B43-422C-4B65-8A70-B01F01F8FD97@cisco.com> <4EB552F0.6050800@acm.org> <D862A193-BD64-445C-A2D0-A35B520A13F0@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <D862A193-BD64-445C-A2D0-A35B520A13F0@cisco.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.1.2
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Ned Freed <ned.freed@mrochek.com>, Keith Moore <moore@network-heretics.com>, Keith Moore <moore@cs.utk.edu>, Behave WG <behave@ietf.org>, rtcweb@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] [BEHAVE] URI schemes for TURN and STUN
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: Sat, 05 Nov 2011 15:45:12 -0000

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 11/05/2011 08:28 AM, Gonzalo Salgueiro wrote:
> 
> On Nov 5, 2011, at 11:14 AM, Marc Petit-Huguenin wrote:
> 
> On 11/05/2011 08:04 AM, Gonzalo Salgueiro wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Nov 5, 2011, at 10:30 AM, Eric Rescorla wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Nov 4, 2011 at 5:18 PM, Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no
>>>>> <mailto:harald@alvestrand.no>
>>>>> <mailto:harald@alvestrand.no>> wrote:
>>>>>> On 11/04/2011 04:56 PM, Eric Rescorla wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>> I don't have any commitment to the scheme. What's the best place?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I like parameters, like this:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> turn://user@host?proto=tcp
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Quite hard to misunderstand, and quite easy to extend.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> (Note: // is only allowed if what follows is [user[:pass]@]host - I don't
>>>>>> recommend using the password, for the obvious reasons, but the syntax will
>>>>>> allow it.)
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't see any security problem with that. The "break old
>>>>> implementations" rationale
>>>>> doesn't apply when we are defining a new URI scheme.
>>>>
>>>> I agree with this as well.  If we can get some consensus with this, I will
>>>> update the next version of both the STUN and TURN URI Scheme drafts to include
>>>> this format.
> 
> Or you can look at draft-petithuguenin-behave-turn-uri-bis, which is already
> doing it right (and had a lot of reviews back in 2008, before I split the
> resolution mechanism and the syntax in two separate documents).
> 
>> I was under the impression (based on an exchange with Cullen) that you had no
>> plans to pass user credentials in the URI scheme you were proposing.

Yes, and you can count me as opposing user credentials in *any* new URI.

>> I'm
>> perfectly OK with whatever the group decides. Nonetheless, the change makes
>> change to me for one or both drafts.
> 
> I know my email address does not contain the magical "cisco.com
> <http://cisco.com>", but this is
> getting ridiculous.
> 
>> I have no idea where this came from, so I'll choose to leave it alone.
> 
>> Regards,
> 
>> Gonzalo
> 
> 
>>

- -- 
Marc Petit-Huguenin
Personal email: marc@petit-huguenin.org
Professional email: petithug@acm.org
Blog: http://blog.marc.petit-huguenin.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAk61WgAACgkQ9RoMZyVa61dvDACfd9Aco1hi/jupuRXAyKA41s4x
fzYAn2fpCMY/e5e0POFk+t4PY0lijX6O
=sI2K
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email