Re: [tram] RFC 7635 on Session Traversal Utilities for NAT (STUN) Extension for Third-Party Authorization

cool, thanks !

Oleg

On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 5:13 AM, Tirumaleswar Reddy (tireddy)
<tireddy@cisco.com> wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Oleg Moskalenko [mailto:mom040267@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Thursday, August 27, 2015 5:37 PM
>> To: Tirumaleswar Reddy (tireddy)
>> Cc: tram@ietf.org
>> Subject: Re: [tram] RFC 7635 on Session Traversal Utilities for NAT (STUN)
>> Extension for Third-Party Authorization
>>
>> Tiru, thanks for the fix (I suppose that the new Mobility document, version 04
>> to be published).
>>
>> But in the coturn server, I still have a conflict problem. It is implementing the
>> ORIGIN draft, too; and for the ORIGIN attribute, I currently have 0x802F
>> tentatively assigned.
>>
>> I understand that we do not know when and if IANA will ever assign real
>> numbers for those attributes because I am not sure which one document will
>> ever become an RFC.
>>
>> I know that there are people who are using implementation of those drafts
>> for experimental purposes. Can we avoid that new conflict ?
>> Could you please assign a different number to MIBILITY-TICKET ? I suppose
>> that any number is going to be temporary, anyway, and everything has to go
>> through the normal IANA application etc. In coturn, I have 0x8030 available -
>> can we use that for MIBILITY-TICKET ?
>
> Yes, updated draft.
>
> -Tiru
>
>>
>> Thanks !
>> Oleg
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 2:05 AM, Tirumaleswar Reddy (tireddy)
>> <tireddy@cisco.com> wrote:
>> >> -----Original Message-----
>> >> From: tram [mailto:tram-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Oleg
>> >> Moskalenko
>> >> Sent: Thursday, August 27, 2015 1:20 PM
>> >> To: tram@ietf.org
>> >> Subject: Re: [tram] RFC 7635 on Session Traversal Utilities for NAT
>> >> (STUN) Extension for Third-Party Authorization
>> >>
>> >> With this RFC 7635 issued, we now have a conflict with STUN
>> >> attributes in different documents.
>> >>
>> >> RFC 7635 suggest 0x802E attribute for THIRD-PARTY-AUTHORIZATION.
>> >>
>> >> The same value is used for MOBILITY-TICKET in TURN-mobility draft:
>> >>
>> >> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-wing-tram-turn-mobility-03
>> >>
>> >> That has to be fixed.
>> >
>> > Yes, fixed in my local copy (assigned 0x802F).
>> >
>> > -Tiru
>> >
>> >>
>> >> Thanks
>> >> Oleg
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 7:55 PM,  <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> wrote:
>> >> > A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >         RFC 7635
>> >> >
>> >> >         Title:      Session Traversal Utilities for NAT
>> >> >                     (STUN) Extension for Third-Party Authorization
>> >> >         Author:     T. Reddy, P. Patil,
>> >> >                     R. Ravindranath, J. Uberti
>> >> >         Status:     Standards Track
>> >> >         Stream:     IETF
>> >> >         Date:       August 2015
>> >> >         Mailbox:    tireddy@cisco.com,
>> >> >                     praspati@cisco.com,
>> >> >                     rmohanr@cisco.com,
>> >> >                     justin@uberti.name
>> >> >         Pages:      24
>> >> >         Characters: 51753
>> >> >         Updates/Obsoletes/SeeAlso:   None
>> >> >
>> >> >         I-D Tag:    draft-ietf-tram-turn-third-party-authz-16.txt
>> >> >
>> >> >         URL:        https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7635
>> >> >
>> >> >         DOI:        http://dx.doi.org/10.17487/RFC7635
>> >> >
>> >> > This document proposes the use of OAuth 2.0 to obtain and validate
>> >> > ephemeral tokens that can be used for Session Traversal Utilities
>> >> > for NAT (STUN) authentication.  The usage of ephemeral tokens
>> >> > ensures that access to a STUN server can be controlled even if the
>> >> > tokens are compromised.
>> >> >
>> >> > This document is a product of the TURN Revised and Modernized
>> >> > Working
>> >> Group of the IETF.
>> >> >
>> >> > This is now a Proposed Standard.
>> >> >
>> >> > STANDARDS TRACK: This document specifies an Internet Standards
>> >> > Track protocol for the Internet community, and requests discussion
>> >> > and suggestions for improvements.  Please refer to the current
>> >> > edition of the Official Internet Protocol Standards
>> >> > (https://www.rfc-editor.org/standards) for the standardization
>> >> > state and status of this protocol.  Distribution of this memo is unlimited.
>> >> >
>> >> > This announcement is sent to the IETF-Announce and rfc-dist lists.
>> >> > To subscribe or unsubscribe, see
>> >> >   https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce
>> >> >   https://mailman.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist
>> >> >
>> >> > For searching the RFC series, see https://www.rfc-editor.org/search
>> >> > For downloading RFCs, see https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc.html
>> >> >
>> >> > Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the
>> >> > author of the RFC in question, or to rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org.
>> >> > Unless specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are
>> >> > for unlimited distribution.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > The RFC Editor Team
>> >> > Association Management Solutions, LLC
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > _______________________________________________
>> >> > tram mailing list
>> >> > tram@ietf.org
>> >> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tram
>> >>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> tram mailing list
>> >> tram@ietf.org
>> >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tram