Re: [rtcweb] IP handling: Using mDNS names for host candidates

As these changes are essentially clarifications of existing 5245 text, I
don't see a need for existing docs (e.g. JSEP) to be updated.

On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 7:49 AM Christer Holmberg <
christer.holmberg@ericsson.com> wrote:

> Does that mean that RTCWEB is actually going to reference ice-sip-sdp and
> ICEbis (instead of RFC 5245)?
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
>
>
> Christer
>
>
>
> *From:* rtcweb [mailto:rtcweb-bounces@ietf.org] *On Behalf Of *Justin
> Uberti
> *Sent:* 18 July 2018 10:18
> *To:* Ted Hardie <ted.ietf@gmail.com>
> *Cc:* RTCWeb IETF <rtcweb@ietf.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [rtcweb] IP handling: Using mDNS names for host candidates
>
>
>
> Yeah, I think we just need to emphasize that the FQDN can be a mDNS name.
> Here's my current suggestion for updates to S 4.1 in ice-sip-sdp
> <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-mmusic-ice-sip-sdp-21#section-4.1>
> :
>
>
>
> <connection-address>:  is taken from RFC 4566 [RFC4566].  It is the
> IP address of the candidate.  When parsing this field, an agent
> can differentiate an IPv4 address and an IPv6 address by presence
> of a colon in its value -- the presence of a colon indicates IPv6.
> An agent MUST ignore candidate lines that include candidates with
> IP address versions that are not supported or recognized.  An IP
> address SHOULD be used, but an FQDN (including a mDNS [RFC6762] name)
> MAY be used in place of an IP address.
>
>
>
> In the case of receiving an candidate containing a FQDN, the hostname is
> looked up via DNS or mDNS as appropriate, first using an AAAA record
> (assuming the agent
> supports IPv6), and if no result is found or the agent only
> supports IPv4, using an A record.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 3:11 PM Ted Hardie <ted.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 4:46 PM, Peter Thatcher <
> pthatcher=40google.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
>
> Where is the right place to comment on draft-mdns-ice-candidates?
>
>
>
> I looked at it from an ICE WG perspective, and it seems to be that since
> (in RFC 5245), the candidate address can be a FQDN (section 15.1) you don't
> need the special steps you have in section 3.2, because a .local address is
> a FQDN (isn't it?).
>
>
>
> The use of a .local signals that this is a special use name within the
> context of multicast DNS (RFC 6762).  One key difference there is that the
> uniqueness of a standard DNS name is derived from the hierarchical
> delegation of the DNS.  Uniqueness in MDNS is achieved using a local probe
> and announce method.  As Harald pointed out in the room, there are some
> latency consequences to that; those might be avoided by generating probable
> uniqueness in names via the UUID mechanism, but that still need to be
> worked out.  That, I think means the work in 3.1 is definitely needed.
>
>
>
> I think the only novel thing would be to perhaps make it clear that mDNS
> should be used for the name resolution.
>
>
>
> You might treat the special steps as redundant (since .local should signal
> mDNS), but I personally think it is helpful, because it discourages
> coalescing with standard DNS responses (which is permitted by 6762).
>
>
>
> Just my personal opinion.
>
>
>
> Ted
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 6:07 PM youenn fablet <youennf@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> A draft describing the Safari/WebKit approach is available at
> https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-mdns-ice-candidates-00.txt
>
>
>
> Eric, can you precise the kind of information you would like to have?
>
> Some testing has been done to validate the approach but I do not think
> this is representative of the actual state of the affair. Safari/WebKit is
> not gathering any related statistic..
>
>
>
>    Y
>
>
>
> Le ven. 29 juin 2018 à 11:10, Justin Uberti <juberti=
> 40google.com@dmarc.ietf.org> a écrit :
>
> I believe such data will be forthcoming from the Safari team. We are also
> working on this.
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 7:03 AM Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm..com
> <ekr@rtfm.com>> wrote:
>
> It seems like this is something one could A/B test and measure connection
> rates. Has someone done so?
>
>
>
> -Ekr
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
>
>
>