IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [tram] TURN server discovery (please discuss!)

Cb B <cb.list6@gmail.com> Thu, 20 March 2014 17:19 UTC

Return-Path: <cb.list6@gmail.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 15EFA1A0700 for <tram@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 20 Mar 2014 10:19:17 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.749
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.749 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
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 t6nEjLh-Skxj for <tram@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 20 Mar 2014 10:19:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wi0-x22f.google.com (mail-wi0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c05::22f]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7986F1A03BF for <tram@ietf.org>; Thu, 20 Mar 2014 10:19:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wi0-f175.google.com with SMTP id cc10so6510063wib.2 for <tram@ietf.org>; Thu, 20 Mar 2014 10:19:06 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=uaagFBvzFfAykIXMSqtWJ+Dqi0sR3hCtIBt+LPQLBZI=; b=Bc9IkyxMEkWSDZDmIMpt/ACK10o1CpR1WPTyVJ9ehH27yWfc1kFcgogWZgxgyq8duo xidxB5atKOHEzbGfLNLWrYWzc5GjACPZ0URMU6Q3qsSp4VzE41n1H7gdyb61hGmQWHdQ JcNdn4jCnFMmw1Hlf3fBynggcdg1Eve9NiymHofm6tKh8PtF2antzNUYKV53sJcgZQpR fwY3m2LOA8W1kVfOUqxsz3UMuH2sYLUt/665F38rfrO7yGbK6EWGNR+1qtsItv/74bd8 ktWUWZtA1nHX3GPwltpXuoGTpAod3cSqo4MdLqJRg1mT8SjbUbu17JR7JMhhEC/Cpyoo rGng==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.194.63.46 with SMTP id d14mr35433491wjs.24.1395335945954; Thu, 20 Mar 2014 10:19:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.216.106.130 with HTTP; Thu, 20 Mar 2014 10:19:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.216.106.130 with HTTP; Thu, 20 Mar 2014 10:19:05 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <913383AAA69FF945B8F946018B75898A242D8EFD@xmb-rcd-x10.cisco.com>
References: <532AF25B.4020301@viagenie.ca> <CAD6AjGRYE-GcQwnwK14ERrVsKNVq1R1xovJV7HPoZk=R5Yf9hQ@mail.gmail.com> <913383AAA69FF945B8F946018B75898A242D8EFD@xmb-rcd-x10.cisco.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2014 10:19:05 -0700
Message-ID: <CAD6AjGToqy2HevFq1wq_s+mJN3A8siJvQ6zUB0YV4qH_S6SNkw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Cb B <cb.list6@gmail.com>
To: "Tirumaleswar Reddy (tireddy)" <tireddy@cisco.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="047d7ba97a8866aa7a04f50cf7ad"
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tram/BoH6R7ERa5fbzXKIusbI6CnNl4g
Cc: Simon Perreault <simon.perreault@viagenie.ca>, "tram@ietf.org" <tram@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [tram] TURN server discovery (please discuss!)
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: <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: Thu, 20 Mar 2014 17:19:17 -0000

On Mar 20, 2014 7:48 AM, "Tirumaleswar Reddy (tireddy)" <tireddy@cisco.com>
wrote:
>
> Just adding a data point, mobile networks generally don't use dhcp so
that limits the scope of dhcp as an option.
>
> I anticipate mobile networks will need TURN.
>
> CB
>
> [TR]
>
>
>
> we had discussed similar problem to discover PCP servers in Mobile
Networks (
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-chen-pcp-mobile-deployment-04#section-4)
sometime back. Based on the discussion
>
> 1)DHCPv6 stateless configuration information is supported by 3GPP
specification (http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6459#section-5.2)
>
> 2)Since DHCPv4 is not widely used, possible solutions discussed to solve
the problem are anycast, enhancing PCO to provide TURN {PCP} server IP
address
>
>
>
> -Tiru

I dont know any deployed mobile network where those will work today.

Today with IMS in mobile networks, NAPTR is used in DNS, so in would
suggest that as a viable path

CB

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email