IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [tram] SSODA in TURN-bis

Oleg Moskalenko <mom040267@gmail.com> Thu, 08 January 2015 04:56 UTC

Return-Path: <mom040267@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 79CB31A8852 for <tram@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 7 Jan 2015 20:56:27 -0800 (PST)
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 gP72_YPdQk39 for <tram@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 7 Jan 2015 20:56:25 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-we0-x22c.google.com (mail-we0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c03::22c]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9DCB61A1A9D for <tram@ietf.org>; Wed, 7 Jan 2015 20:56:25 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-we0-f172.google.com with SMTP id k11so448218wes.3 for <tram@ietf.org>; Wed, 07 Jan 2015 20:56:24 -0800 (PST)
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=vbjAwCEFlxY0tb2PvizyCCrcs9hYG7s5PzxYbc3GWAg=; b=hjbxeQHRPsbSTDLoZYJRQ0S8tb1F3O2rjvGdbyCsfYyYHXFreKZc+iaH6ApvZ3aDqh pfDbsmyHT5203GT1YDtwZezhgdrMpGw9l192VL2DMra8BvKeiO+wOnn23RP/9n1+UlZA NYvqGSQ8B5BYgEEbzK2JKHQF5eulXz1qlnPioXxbuACl6/g1vn9F6VvMI/jU+FOpkEMG ZQrPzT2D/hHwgYJvnRRGQET6q0svPJ4srBmTBNf/fqKFxLQA62zJX7elFW98jIeg2yDb 17dow/ndM+LZbfQQ2c5qRgm1eP5777l8PRERlSUE4sx5TPwEUV84QWnYfrxVQJmZlIpI UkkA==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.181.28.165 with SMTP id jp5mr56370727wid.76.1420692984371; Wed, 07 Jan 2015 20:56:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.194.238.132 with HTTP; Wed, 7 Jan 2015 20:56:24 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <913383AAA69FF945B8F946018B75898A35527E46@xmb-rcd-x10.cisco.com>
References: <913383AAA69FF945B8F946018B75898A35527E46@xmb-rcd-x10.cisco.com>
Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2015 20:56:24 -0800
Message-ID: <CALDtMrL1hgfJk1L=rZNm+aHABZPFOy-006SQpousJFjDUyWGTQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Oleg Moskalenko <mom040267@gmail.com>
To: "Tirumaleswar Reddy (tireddy)" <tireddy@cisco.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a1137eac4ab1f66050c1cdc60"
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tram/VSSv5KYHqKdcwMAsvDqAyVnMh1s
Cc: "tram@ietf.org" <tram@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [tram] SSODA in TURN-bis
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, 08 Jan 2015 04:56:27 -0000

Hi Tiru

I can tell for sure that it will NOT break the rfc5766-turn-server.

And this is how SSODA is implemented in CoTURN server.

Thanks
Oleg


On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 6:02 PM, Tirumaleswar Reddy (tireddy) <
tireddy@cisco.com> wrote:

>  Hi all,
>
>
>
> We are working on incorporating RFC6156 and SSODA into TURN-bis. During
> IETF-91 meeting there was discussion if the technique proposed in
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-martinsen-tram-ssoda-01 would break
> existing TURN server implementations.  Pal had mentioned testing with four
> implementations and did not face any problem.
>
>
>
> Please let us know if there are any concerns with the existing proposal of
> conveying two REQUESTED-ADDRESS-FAMILY attributes with different attribute
> values in Allocate request ?
>
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> -Tiru
>
> _______________________________________________
> tram mailing list
> tram@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tram
>
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email