Re: [tram] Two new authentication mechanisms

Brandon Williams <brandon.williams@akamai.com> Mon, 14 July 2014 19:53 UTC

Return-Path: <brandon.williams@akamai.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 6F8DE1A00B2 for <tram@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 14 Jul 2014 12:53:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.851
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.851 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.651] 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 4ds4k1dXUkcy for <tram@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 14 Jul 2014 12:53:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from prod-mail-xrelay02.akamai.com (prod-mail-xrelay02.akamai.com [72.246.2.14]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 214E51A00A3 for <tram@ietf.org>; Mon, 14 Jul 2014 12:53:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from prod-mail-xrelay02.akamai.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by postfix.imss70 (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9855C285BD for <tram@ietf.org>; Mon, 14 Jul 2014 19:53:44 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from prod-mail-relay06.akamai.com (prod-mail-relay06.akamai.com [172.17.120.126]) by prod-mail-xrelay02.akamai.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8516628586 for <tram@ietf.org>; Mon, 14 Jul 2014 19:53:44 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from [172.28.115.172] (bowill.kendall.corp.akamai.com [172.28.115.172]) by prod-mail-relay06.akamai.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E0202029 for <tram@ietf.org>; Mon, 14 Jul 2014 19:53:44 +0000 (GMT)
Message-ID: <53C43548.5070101@akamai.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2014 15:53:44 -0400
From: Brandon Williams <brandon.williams@akamai.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.5.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: tram@ietf.org
References: <53AD6FD6.3080205@per.reau.lt> <53C2913C.2010906@jive.com>
In-Reply-To: <53C2913C.2010906@jive.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tram/9_pHZToHU220M2fqLN2BINyf4Kc
Subject: Re: [tram] Two new authentication mechanisms
X-BeenThere: tram@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
Reply-To: brandon.williams@akamai.com
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Mon, 14 Jul 2014 19:53:47 -0000

I've had spotty internet connectivity for the past few weeks, so failed 
to join the consensus ahead of time. Nevertheless, I'm happy to see 
adoption of both these drafts, which are both critical for supporting 
third party TURN services IMO.

--Brandon


On 07/13/2014 10:01 AM, Simon Perreault wrote:
> Consensus is clear: TRAM adopts the two drafts.
>
> Thanks all,
> Simon & Gonzalo
>
> Le 2014-06-27 09:21, Simon Perreault a écrit :
>> TRAMsters,
>>
>> We are soliciting discussion on the potential adoption as working-group
>> documents of these two drafts:
>>
>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-johnston-tram-stun-origin
>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-reddy-tram-turn-third-party-authz
>>
>> They would be targeted at fulfilling milestone 4 ("Nov 2014 - Send new
>> authentication mechanism(s) to IESG for publication as Proposed Standard").
>>
>> If you would like to see one or both of the drafts adopted, or if you
>> are opposed, please explain why. Authors, we will assume you are for
>> adoption of your own drafts.
>>
>> Please consider the interactions between the two drafts. Is there
>> anything interesting or problematic? What about overlap in function? Is
>> there any? If so, is it necessary or problematic?
>>
>> Let's take two weeks to discuss this.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Simon & Gonzalo
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>

-- 
Brandon Williams; Senior Principal Software Engineer
Emerging Products Engineering; Akamai Technologies Inc.

-- 
Brandon Williams; Senior Principal Software Engineer
Emerging Products Engineering; Akamai Technologies Inc.