IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [tram] WGLC draft-ietf-tram-alpn-00

Simon Perreault <sperreault@jive.com> Wed, 17 September 2014 15:31 UTC

Return-Path: <sperreault@jive.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 4BABC1A03E7 for <tram@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 17 Sep 2014 08:31:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.978
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.978 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 vAf7c9ZVssGB for <tram@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 17 Sep 2014 08:31:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lb0-f174.google.com (mail-lb0-f174.google.com [209.85.217.174]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 52D651A0371 for <tram@ietf.org>; Wed, 17 Sep 2014 08:31:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lb0-f174.google.com with SMTP id 10so2071405lbg.33 for <tram@ietf.org>; Wed, 17 Sep 2014 08:31:05 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=PjV71vz0s8eW+2bOFy/Lf8kYlK+xl7wxGRpZO2hOewc=; b=FqUYAlv6tQ9TFhH1pvYapdPmPljkYoS3mRHwQtGQjBCkZmbntpO1g1HCeypQYOD6yX MP4qP7wksmu93SolbYWIG/qBAt1pACKJBAUEB1qkG0c9VbCmUYjsbkeXEZ0b6NRwgT/n WGcUuvwQUtKUGNcaAmRSCQkuuFCTYGcNDa4IsUBKEHoOG3m7hRYubagEp4+82EkLVJ06 46gAAqatXcf+NgILjlC+RGIA0RtfZYbZcEPsZf/+N3CouLWlijQkyfTfh8h8x1cb5s/6 aKm4r5+PVLpSP8FNm55LcN7pxr4//pIYutGAWul6XZTFXeHdIO9lfs79/SfqL3mxqY8l H8Tg==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnPeOHmYwaOZA48BipAtMjs+H13NEG1VaunIE33KDuDZ9bq43PSw6wgLLh7TOMX8bAVAiKD
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.152.36.134 with SMTP id q6mr45408259laj.35.1410967865611; Wed, 17 Sep 2014 08:31:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.25.137.6 with HTTP; Wed, 17 Sep 2014 08:31:05 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <D03F9499.4E036%praspati@cisco.com>
References: <CANO7kWCiU275DnNsJ7pn8ALjpV5qVViCQUQS8VOgubArGYG_5g@mail.gmail.com> <CABkgnnXWLhAggZwP3ZhDsDMnx6ueYOjrMw12=tD9xEryx_5Z0A@mail.gmail.com> <C7219C6D-A887-4E05-8869-996F8B32D810@cisco.com> <CABkgnnV_u32ZLpoKxX7Z7ExbJAEOXgR9BgiZnRg7vEWFhaZ4rw@mail.gmail.com> <AEE73BD1-650C-41C5-A904-CD8E0E754EB3@cisco.com> <CABkgnnV5_anUGTcBFqfZOPSJ_GgT3XLsq2R1_1_dvUVb9yt8jQ@mail.gmail.com> <D03E1542.4DDBC%praspati@cisco.com> <CABkgnnXFtovkGegh5nieS5CWxUg6q8MQNm=V4od=J=BukkbPvA@mail.gmail.com> <CANO7kWDH0X3+ai0VxT0FaQUWA9jACrpAJPqLV+8wANcRuk9tLw@mail.gmail.com> <D03F9499.4E036%praspati@cisco.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2014 11:31:05 -0400
Message-ID: <CANO7kWABtGap4jFZmoksGCYB1vSZ7z9d-9DUqK_2pBYvnzQTEw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Simon Perreault <sperreault@jive.com>
To: "Prashanth Patil (praspati)" <praspati@cisco.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="047d7b5d91ef6b77850503448e9f"
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tram/ROpo9oH_ydvHUpFMGjHIOgkVTWc
Cc: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>, "Gonzalo Salgueiro (gsalguei)" <gsalguei@cisco.com>, "tram@ietf.org" <tram@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [tram] WGLC draft-ietf-tram-alpn-00
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: Wed, 17 Sep 2014 15:31:09 -0000

On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 11:03 AM, Prashanth Patil (praspati) <
praspati@cisco.com> wrote:

> The whole paragraph is hard to understand IMHO. I would rewrite simply:
> "stun: This label is used as a fallback for STUN usages that do not have a
> corresponding ALPN label."
>
>
>  Our intention was that 'stun' could identify any usage, including
> TURN/nat-discovery that have well defined labels, and not just a fallback
> for something that doesn’t have a well defined ALPN label. Too ambiguous?
>

What's the point? Why would anyone emit "stun" when something more precise
is available?

Simon

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email