Re: [tram] I-D Action: draft-ietf-tram-turnbis-15.txt

Noriyuki Torii <torii0573@gmail.com> Mon, 19 March 2018 00:59 UTC

Return-Path: <torii0573@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: tram@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tram@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F2C03129C70 for <tram@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 18 Mar 2018 17:59:30 -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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 EZnODSIeEY6X for <tram@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 18 Mar 2018 17:59:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ot0-x22e.google.com (mail-ot0-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c0f::22e]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 36B74126C22 for <tram@ietf.org>; Sun, 18 Mar 2018 17:59:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ot0-x22e.google.com with SMTP id y11-v6so15723688otg.0 for <tram@ietf.org>; Sun, 18 Mar 2018 17:59:29 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=1ACz2LxDaIYlJaJKMQh9DS/6iwjlBWuuGG7gSqCvUyY=; b=J2+FTc8pWiIrnud7+4Bn47vTQ7eWuk84In2b70czp9LZzkCUejVkLGNiMDYQws315E 1b1gvoJtQvzHTkSRmU7D4GrbJj52jo6yfi0RGcb321ynzHRabR6Hzciw1AZIp6LzLHWg cf/gc9pQZB+XA26TSrjTmDD4ugi9zYAkR8FcdhFh9sHBHz8pagy76+ci0sD6/NFqpVxW iioKbgLd5e7nVNaa6Qw6EzDylG77txEmRL65u3YUgSvDdQ1k3puo2aOh3V6Elj912EJY rNRVNTs/2qNX3hjLxnjM8iUN7dSL7x3/ZV3iVxLPC9Yb0eHEbznnRWF4wdBsdT1bEgx5 16Pw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=1ACz2LxDaIYlJaJKMQh9DS/6iwjlBWuuGG7gSqCvUyY=; b=XLbXoi/lJH8v7HW/VZWA+ewugcXbTcxV/ysZZGnrn9iSZ8PUvk4rykBgt5NU4sY9UN rw2AcirvozlDygh5w5af4u6CkS9iP1JEWnGHSPyJxrP1pqndNrH9EfofQPhb3deX6GfX AESLa1AeUcI8Nm+xz6fYGjlLxgfICp2JFuA3plWu0wwNzhFV/87u+TOomRsSCNmTb4F3 SVL8GL4vz/Z5YQH1L6BAfyd1zjcqFJkZNwbGaEJErvMjpabEvZJisvQNTuiDyc/cBS7A UDpw+NjBzfW9g+q+hXgfnnZmZYESnNPV90QqfWcAPhq/GI96OdWP5uZRPZNPaIUrvFo2 Rlmg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AElRT7GKsmIttnOVJZYd/9DN+blZ9ZRqLXHpUxefBjMQqqxeHCqgn9af rKX3R/mcNPWaLbVG/EOaCoihuV02psphAHWBJCw=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AG47ELuWTIyb+5Lutd+YNqV9Zdj8Dp0vGq4ndxd/X0jWlEwJqB/jYPSXhSKou2vNLyilLhfsWCG3sIFoXu7m4MtUvKc=
X-Received: by 2002:a9d:222a:: with SMTP id o39-v6mr6858438ota.176.1521421168509; Sun, 18 Mar 2018 17:59:28 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.201.115.209 with HTTP; Sun, 18 Mar 2018 17:59:28 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <BN6PR16MB1425D61744AC7480972C800AEAD50@BN6PR16MB1425.namprd16.prod.outlook.com>
References: <152136260256.18150.10551009018364033510@ietfa.amsl.com> <BN6PR16MB1425D61744AC7480972C800AEAD50@BN6PR16MB1425.namprd16.prod.outlook.com>
From: Noriyuki Torii <torii0573@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2018 09:59:28 +0900
Message-ID: <CABEjbR+uJQKegDWSncE5yM1sp=E+d0sHFdydhiGfyYS2U2n7Nw@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Konda, Tirumaleswar Reddy" <TirumaleswarReddy_Konda@mcafee.com>
Cc: "tram@ietf.org" <tram@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tram/UvWROusGNjGiXkAMm9hc-ku3kT8>
Subject: Re: [tram] I-D Action: draft-ietf-tram-turnbis-15.txt
X-BeenThere: tram@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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, 19 Mar 2018 00:59:31 -0000

Hi Tiru,

I checked updated I-D and found some more points in section 12 below.

>      0x4000 through 0x4FFF: These values are the allowed channel
>      numbers (16,384 possible values).
                ~~~~~~
This value also need to be amended to 4,096.

>      0x8000 through 0xFFFF: These values are reserved for future use.

This line can be removed now because the previous sentence imply it, too.

And also, I think it may be preferable if the following paragraph is updated
so as to alignment to RFC 7983.

>   Because of this division, ChannelData messages can be distinguished
>   from STUN-formatted messages (e.g., Allocate request, Send
>   indication, etc.) by examining the first two bits of the message:
>
>      0b00: STUN-formatted message (since the first two bits of a STUN-
>      formatted message are always zero).
>
>      0b01: ChannelData message (since the channel number is the first
>      field in the ChannelData message and channel numbers fall in the
>      range 0x4000 - 0x7FFF).
>
>      0b10: Reserved
>
>      0b11: Reserved
>
>   The reserved values may be used in the future to extend the range of
>   channel numbers.  Thus, an implementation MUST NOT assume that a TURN
>   message always starts with a 0 bit.

I guess it could be

    According to RFC 7983, ChannelData messages can be distinguished
    from other multiplexed protocols by examining the first byte of the
    message:

          [0..3]  STUN
        [16..19]  ZRTP
        [20..63]  DTLS
        [64..79]  TURN Channel
      [128..191]  RTP/RTCP
          others  reserved, MUST be dropped and an alert MAY be logged

    Reserved values may be used in the future by other protocols.
    Thus, an implementation MUST comply the discrimination above.


Finally, in section 18, the example Refresh request in the diagram of the
page 67 doesn't have the PASSWORD-ALGORITHMS attribute nevertheless
it has the PASSWORD-ALGORITHM attributes, also need to be fixed.

Regards,
Noriyuki Torii

----------------

2018-03-18 17:50 GMT+09:00 Konda, Tirumaleswar Reddy
<TirumaleswarReddy_Konda@mcafee.com>:
> This revision addresses comments from Mark, Karl and Noriyuki Torii.
>
> -Tiru
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: tram [mailto:tram-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of internet-
>> drafts@ietf.org
>> Sent: Sunday, March 18, 2018 8:43 AM
>> To: i-d-announce@ietf.org
>> Cc: tram@ietf.org
>> Subject: [tram] I-D Action: draft-ietf-tram-turnbis-15.txt
>>
>>
>> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
>> This draft is a work item of the TURN Revised and Modernized WG of the
>> IETF.
>>
>>         Title           : Traversal Using Relays around NAT (TURN): Relay Extensions
>> to Session Traversal Utilities for NAT (STUN)
>>         Authors         : Tirumaleswar Reddy
>>                           Alan Johnston
>>                           Philip Matthews
>>                           Jonathan Rosenberg
>>       Filename        : draft-ietf-tram-turnbis-15.txt
>>       Pages           : 84
>>       Date            : 2018-03-18
>>
>> Abstract:
>>    If a host is located behind a NAT, then in certain situations it can
>>    be impossible for that host to communicate directly with other hosts
>>    (peers).  In these situations, it is necessary for the host to use
>>    the services of an intermediate node that acts as a communication
>>    relay.  This specification defines a protocol, called TURN (Traversal
>>    Using Relays around NAT), that allows the host to control the
>>    operation of the relay and to exchange packets with its peers using
>>    the relay.  TURN differs from some other relay control protocols in
>>    that it allows a client to communicate with multiple peers using a
>>    single relay address.
>>
>>    The TURN protocol was designed to be used as part of the ICE
>>    (Interactive Connectivity Establishment) approach to NAT traversal,
>>    though it also can be used without ICE.
>>
>>    This document obsoletes RFC 5766 and RFC 6156.
>>
>>
>> The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tram-turnbis/
>>
>> There are also htmlized versions available at:
>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-tram-turnbis-15
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-tram-turnbis-15
>>
>> A diff from the previous version is available at:
>> https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-tram-turnbis-15
>>
>>
>> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
>> until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.
>>
>> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
>> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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