Re: [secdir] secdir review of draft-ietf-behave-turn-uri-03.txt

[Magnus Westerlund <[e-mail]>]

Juergen Schoenwaelder skrev:
> On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 12:01:06PM +0200, Magnus Westerlund wrote:
>  
>> I do understand your confusion. RFC 5389 is STUN. TURN is an extension
>> of STUN, and TURN mandates authentication. The default to use mechanism
>> however, is defined in STUN, thus the reference to RFC 5389.
> 
> Thanks, now I understand this better. So does this wording describe
> the situation correctly:
> 
>    This is achieved for "turn" URIs by the Long-Term Credential
>    Mechanism defined in [RFC5389], which is mandatory for TURN
>    [RFCxxx]. For a "turns" URI, the usage of TLS addresses the
>    requirement."
> 
> Having both references would have helped me to understand the
> situation better (showing my ignorance of TURN ;-).

Yes, I think that part is good.

I would note that TLS may not be sufficient for reaching the
authentication goal. Only that is has the capability to reach them. But
also for TLS you can use the Long-Term Credential mechanism to
authenticate the user of a TURN server.

Cheers

Magnus Westerlund

IETF Transport Area Director
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Multimedia Technologies, Ericsson Research EAB/TVM
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ericsson AB                | Phone  [phone]
Färögatan 6                | Mobile [phone]
SE-164 80 Stockholm, Sweden| mailto: [e-mail]
----------------------------------------------------------------------