Re: [tram] TRAM rechartering

"Ram Mohan R (rmohanr)" <rmohanr@cisco.com> Fri, 11 September 2015 18:02 UTC

Return-Path: <rmohanr@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: tram@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tram@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B8EBB1B50D9 for <tram@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 11 Sep 2015 11:02:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.51
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.51 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] 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 ir3Ncus8oatM for <tram@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 11 Sep 2015 11:02:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from alln-iport-8.cisco.com (alln-iport-8.cisco.com [173.37.142.95]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 133601B50D7 for <tram@ietf.org>; Fri, 11 Sep 2015 11:02:02 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=12285; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1441994522; x=1443204122; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:mime-version; bh=FKKRMxj9O2oxwe8uaKzOi6OFX9tL6aADYpt+sz4YoZo=; b=FiMqVh972I5Pt59iiy3AMdOtWs3k29zu3Qn15k3jTJMuCJRVSL9GnyX4 XzOemi4fYBQ8ChyktIEAb1erkexOAYH3eY/OnpedqLPSuLobHiEOGp/Ma 2SIJSF5z4Ru9A0QIvCeeDJT/NEYVvstT8vlBBiYhdURqmnxu+j2JUKSkn I=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0DzAQD4FfNV/5NdJa1dglZNVGkGvS4BDYFuAQmFeQKBVjgUAQEBAQEBAYEKhCMBAQEDAQEBAWsLBQcEAgEIEQMBAQEBJwchBgsUCQgCBAENBRuHfgMKCA3HTQ2EZQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBARMEhnSEfIJQgWQOCTENBAcGhCYFlVYBhzGDW4FtgUyQeHmHPB8BAUKEAXGIVwIeI4EFAQEB
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.17,512,1437436800"; d="scan'208,217";a="187309695"
Received: from rcdn-core-11.cisco.com ([173.37.93.147]) by alln-iport-8.cisco.com with ESMTP; 11 Sep 2015 18:02:01 +0000
Received: from XCH-RCD-017.cisco.com (xch-rcd-017.cisco.com [173.37.102.27]) by rcdn-core-11.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id t8BI20Sm004571 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Fri, 11 Sep 2015 18:02:01 GMT
Received: from xch-rcd-017.cisco.com (173.37.102.27) by XCH-RCD-017.cisco.com (173.37.102.27) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5; Fri, 11 Sep 2015 13:02:00 -0500
Received: from xhc-aln-x04.cisco.com (173.36.12.78) by xch-rcd-017.cisco.com (173.37.102.27) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5 via Frontend Transport; Fri, 11 Sep 2015 13:02:00 -0500
Received: from xmb-aln-x05.cisco.com ([169.254.11.9]) by xhc-aln-x04.cisco.com ([173.36.12.78]) with mapi id 14.03.0248.002; Fri, 11 Sep 2015 13:01:59 -0500
From: "Ram Mohan R (rmohanr)" <rmohanr@cisco.com>
To: Bernard Aboba <bernard.aboba@gmail.com>, "Gonzalo Salgueiro (gsalguei)" <gsalguei@cisco.com>
Thread-Topic: [tram] TRAM rechartering
Thread-Index: AQHQ7Jeh8Li1+pCb+UWOgXKcMckS0543zb0AgAAAcgCAABCWAIAAcEWA
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2015 18:01:58 +0000
Message-ID: <D2191523.413D9%rmohanr@cisco.com>
References: <55F2DA14.3040008@jive.com> <913383AAA69FF945B8F946018B75898A478D2410@xmb-rcd-x10.cisco.com> <E680712E-FE14-40CF-91D8-5F81E4E606E2@cisco.com> <CAOW+2dsvBxrU5Pi7L7n4CrGoW0S5JOzcHXwUBRaOnE=Dr-b+8g@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAOW+2dsvBxrU5Pi7L7n4CrGoW0S5JOzcHXwUBRaOnE=Dr-b+8g@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.5.4.150722
x-originating-ip: [173.36.7.14]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_D2191523413D9rmohanrciscocom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tram/0RZG7fOkmmDbjHWgkPwnH1an40Y>
Cc: Simon Perreault <sperreault@jive.com>, "tram@ietf.org" <tram@ietf.org>, "Tirumaleswar Reddy (tireddy)" <tireddy@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: [tram] TRAM rechartering
X-BeenThere: tram@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discussing the creation of a Turn Revised And Modernized \(TRAM\) WG, which goal is to consolidate the various initiatives to update TURN and STUN." <tram.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tram>, <mailto:tram-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tram/>
List-Post: <mailto:tram@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tram-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tram>, <mailto:tram-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2015 18:02:04 -0000

+1

I also support both these work items.

Ram

From: tram <tram-bounces@ietf.org<mailto:tram-bounces@ietf.org>> on behalf of Bernard Aboba <bernard.aboba@gmail.com<mailto:bernard.aboba@gmail.com>>
Date: Friday, 11 September 2015 10:21 pm
To: "Gonzalo Salgueiro (gsalguei)" <gsalguei@cisco.com<mailto:gsalguei@cisco.com>>
Cc: Simon Perreault <sperreault@jive.com<mailto:sperreault@jive.com>>, "tram@ietf.org<mailto:tram@ietf.org>" <tram@ietf.org<mailto:tram@ietf.org>>, "Tirumaleswar Reddy (tireddy)" <tireddy@cisco.com<mailto:tireddy@cisco.com>>
Subject: Re: [tram] TRAM rechartering

+1

On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 8:51 AM, Gonzalo Salgueiro (gsalguei) <gsalguei@cisco.com<mailto:gsalguei@cisco.com>> wrote:
+1

-G


> On Sep 11, 2015, at 11:50 AM, Tirumaleswar Reddy (tireddy) <tireddy@cisco.com<mailto:tireddy@cisco.com>> wrote:
>
> I support both the work items.
>
> -Tiru
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: tram [mailto:tram-bounces@ietf.org<mailto:tram-bounces@ietf.org>] On Behalf Of Simon Perreault
>> Sent: Friday, September 11, 2015 6:42 AM
>> To: tram@ietf.org<mailto:tram@ietf.org>
>> Subject: [tram] TRAM rechartering
>>
>> TRAMsters,
>>
>> We would like to get some feedback on a proposed rechartering. The goal is
>> to be able to explicitly describe some new work that would be taken on by
>> the working group.
>>
>> The two drafts considered are:
>>
>> - draft-petithuguenin-tram-stun-pmtud-01
>> - draft-wing-tram-turn-mobility-03
>>
>> Charter proposal follows. Diff attached. As you'll see the changes are very
>> minimal. If the new charter is adopted then corresponding milestones will be
>> created.
>>
>> The question we are asking is: are these two new work items things that you
>> want to be working on? The PMTUD draft was presented in Prague and the
>> consensus seemed to be positive. As for the mobility draft, it has been active
>> for a long time and now we are asking the TRAMsters directly if they want to
>> work on it.
>>
>> Thoughts?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Simon & Gonzalo
>>
>>
>>> Traversal Using Relays around NAT (TURN) was published as RFC 5766 in
>>> April 2010. Until recently the protocol had seen rather limited
>>> deployment. This is largely because its primary use case is as one of
>>> the NAT traversal methods of the Interactive Connectivity
>>> Establishment (ICE) framework (RFC 5245), and ICE itself was slow to
>>> achieve widespread adoption, as other mechanisms were already being
>>> used by the VoIP industry. This situation has changed drastically as
>>> ICE, and consequently TURN, are mandatory to implement in WebRTC, a
>>> set of technologies developed at the IETF and W3C to standardize Real
>>> Time Communication on the Web.
>>>
>>> Together with the arrival of WebRTC, there is a renewed interest in
>>> TURN and ICE, as evidenced by recent work updating the ICE framework
>>> (still in progress), and standardizing the URIs used to access a STUN
>>> (RFC 7064) or TURN (RFC 7065) server.
>>>
>>> The goal of the TRAM Working Group is to consolidate the various
>>> initiatives to update TURN and STUN to make them more suitable for the
>>> WebRTC environment. The work will include authentication mechanisms, a
>>> path MTU discovery mechanism, an IP address mobility solution for
>>> TURN, and extensions to TURN and STUN. The Working Group will closely
>>> coordinate with the appropriate Working Groups, including RTCWEB,
>>> MMUSIC, and HTTPBIS.
>>>
>>> In developing upgrades to TURN, the group will consider the passive
>>> monitoring risks introduced by the centralization of call traffic
>>> through a TURN server. When such risks arise, they will recommend
>>> appropriate mitigations. For example, a mechanism for directing
>>> traffic to a TURN server other than one configured by the application
>>> could be used to direct calls through a TURN server configured to do
>> monitoring.
>>> When such a mechanism is used, it is important that the endpoints to
>>> the call apply end-to-end encryption and authentication to ensure that
>>> they are protected from the TURN server.
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> tram mailing list
> tram@ietf.org<mailto:tram@ietf.org>
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tram

_______________________________________________
tram mailing list
tram@ietf.org<mailto:tram@ietf.org>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tram