IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [tram] Two new authentication mechanisms

"Yoakum, John H (John)" <yoakum@avaya.com> Mon, 30 June 2014 16:24 UTC

Return-Path: <yoakum@avaya.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 D22521A0392 for <tram@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 30 Jun 2014 09:24:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.551
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.551 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, 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 A0EBTXJylqQ2 for <tram@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 30 Jun 2014 09:24:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from p-us1-iereast-outbound.us1.avaya.com (p-us1-iereast-outbound.us1.avaya.com [135.11.29.13]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D8E1F1A03A4 for <tram@ietf.org>; Mon, 30 Jun 2014 09:24:48 -0700 (PDT)
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Ah0FAA+OsVPGmAcV/2dsb2JhbABXA4JpJFJavXweh0ABgQ4WdYQDAQEBAQMBAQEPKDQXBAIBCA0EBAEBCxQJBycLFAkIAgQBEggaiCABDKBqpwUXjjAmIRcGC4McgRYFhGMClz+FaYxOg0KBb0E
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos; i="5.01,575,1400040000"; d="scan'208,223"; a="74173813"
Received: from unknown (HELO co300216-co-erhwest-exch.avaya.com) ([198.152.7.21]) by p-us1-iereast-outbound.us1.avaya.com with ESMTP; 30 Jun 2014 12:24:47 -0400
X-OutboundMail_SMTP: 1
Received: from unknown (HELO AZ-US1EXHC04.global.avaya.com) ([135.11.85.15]) by co300216-co-erhwest-out.avaya.com with ESMTP/TLS/AES128-SHA; 30 Jun 2014 12:05:13 -0400
Received: from AZ-US1EXMB06.global.avaya.com ([fe80::38da:dafb:7358:e6f5]) by AZ-US1EXHC04.global.avaya.com ([135.11.85.15]) with mapi id 14.03.0174.001; Mon, 30 Jun 2014 12:24:46 -0400
From: "Yoakum, John H (John)" <yoakum@avaya.com>
To: Simon Perreault <simon@per.reau.lt>, "tram@ietf.org" <tram@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [tram] Two new authentication mechanisms
Thread-Index: AQHPkgq2eBenJRMQWkeiRRvjwbNiwpuJ1Ehg
Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2014 16:24:46 +0000
Message-ID: <93BEDDC39A54294B9E78C7860516FA4743965A82@AZ-US1EXMB06.global.avaya.com>
References: <53AD6FD6.3080205@per.reau.lt>
In-Reply-To: <53AD6FD6.3080205@per.reau.lt>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [135.11.85.49]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tram/KrwOMkyy-eus1mu4mPzLJHtRW44
Subject: Re: [tram] Two new authentication mechanisms
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: Mon, 30 Jun 2014 16:24:51 -0000

>From my perspective, we should keep these two drafts separate as both are interesting but the Origin draft is reasonably mature already, and conceptually very straight forward as it is currently defined.  It would seem the Origin draft could be approved now as we already have both browser and TURN server proof-of-concept implementations (see latest draft update) that demonstrate feasibility, desirability, and usefulness.  Of course the effort to figure out how to add this to a browser was mentally significant but the actual code changes required for a proof-of-concept total just over 100 lines out of ~10M lines in Chrome.  Now that those changes have been made publically available it is straight forward for Google, and reasonably simple for everyone else, to comply with this draft and enable its various value propositions.  The additional bits in the STUN messages are typically quite small and insignificant for the value delivered.  Once we get this draft approved it is likely this functionality can be in browsers quickly, but the browser vendors will probably wait for draft approval to implement it (and we want to limit the use of that attribute value proposed before approval anyway).  In addition to various use cases previously discussed, it will prove to be highly useful to know Origin in various customer service systems where customers are reaching out to contact centers as it helps provide customer context.


Cheers,
John

AVAYA
1.919.425.8446 

-----Original Message-----
From: tram [mailto:tram-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Simon Perreault
Sent: Friday, June 27, 2014 9:21 AM
To: tram@ietf.org
Subject: [tram] Two new authentication mechanisms

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

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email