Re: [tram] Adam Roach's Discuss on draft-ietf-tram-stunbis-16: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Marc Petit-Huguenin <marc@petit-huguenin.org> Sun, 07 October 2018 12:53 UTC

Return-Path: <marc@petit-huguenin.org>
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 85785130E22; Sun, 7 Oct 2018 05:53:54 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.107
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.107 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RDNS_NONE=0.793, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=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 yZm6E2hCTyo5; Sun, 7 Oct 2018 05:53:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from implementers.org (unknown [92.243.22.217]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C98AA130E21; Sun, 7 Oct 2018 05:53:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [IPv6:2601:648:8400:8e7d:6571:21bd:7029:6ef2] (unknown [IPv6:2601:648:8400:8e7d:6571:21bd:7029:6ef2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "Marc Petit-Huguenin", Issuer "implementers.org" (verified OK)) by implementers.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E2D87AE009; Sun, 7 Oct 2018 14:53:49 +0200 (CEST)
To: Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: tram-chairs@ietf.org, Tolga Asveren <tasveren@rbbn.com>, Gonzalo.Camarillo@ericsson.com, draft-ietf-tram-stunbis@ietf.org, tram@ietf.org
References: <152403138853.31946.14807823535362928987.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <27cb2f70-d907-b61f-bb5a-6b19053238fe@petit-huguenin.org> <1e8cd5de-06de-6745-fc4d-d15fcdd0b4d9@petit-huguenin.org> <df27ff82-bb5a-8c83-f119-a6f4e9f65a53@nostrum.com>
From: Marc Petit-Huguenin <marc@petit-huguenin.org>
Openpgp: preference=signencrypt
Autocrypt: addr=marc@petit-huguenin.org; prefer-encrypt=mutual; keydata= mQINBE6Mh9wBEADrUEDZChteJbQtsHwZITZExr7TAqT7pniNwhBX3nFgd+FrV3lsLKJ1rym2 52MAYpubXEJZGzMp6uCCAnROWbtmQbOm8z/jHnjxHhPqfuYCYPpAQqu8K/Sc194Rp37krMwB jz32yr7+gvWLzRgQGKIh9d2mzy8QLMETVWWQWGb6fEfpOxXo0wumN1rc/275kZwOu44JIPGg zbgwZdnEqYOUUa18K9MXeRDoWbwDISP30CvKuZDwD14lbBE3o7tBQrU9uoMhE7eFlTjbsCox qoubI2tZSuOTF8mRXjPmNrRGtf9mYkQnOB7y6qy/QxmOVMq4IRtHzOYIm/EZ6NTodcpZQHOM 2v6B6YK9uKrYrapSpJzn4f9oU7alT31Y3o2hOlxAWDQ16+Dd1MOPYsKQXOwY1/ihm4PTjiJ8 ud8yPzy7c+BSVs5wkBU6QuLNIgZHrrxdn+KxM+F/oAVtfzO7XzVoeOcXyWi3/CHL5pgoBruY enIF/RrRuplpy09pvZjmFPNfqKBYJGnqpQuqsQwO7LsFqDqfY2EuHg+KsGN1XuN+jxXc48/1 gCnKw7ALSPWEb7g25wD6KfiZTAcyRTG8LePNFQKhw61LbIWmkw9EaVLyXvwPTc1iCSc0dDT/ pcT/z+8xrWOyWGZNZAjR584NlDpKollbItcxYtFcYZkvTCmOVwARAQABtC1NYXJjIFBldGl0 LUh1Z3VlbmluIDxtYXJjQHBldGl0LWh1Z3VlbmluLm9yZz6JAjsEEwEIACUCGyMGCwkIBwMC BhUIAgkKCwQWAgMBAh4BAheAAhkBBQJX8tdbAAoJECnERZXWan7EiNkQAIbS72cyalFjxQ1l vEW9S8NjjwIMbb5+NC2XqDakAmZq+Aav/Yfk8aEc+eAWBboVC3NBBjYojMRXK1XEnD7xPQ1X rWd23TDibKajy/2fo/MS9/s6uPFOAINi1ykOMq8ShxMHcIPC/dvVt59a7DV1KPGlnUheNR7N 4rIbkL5KndatD38yTGkyKsFvVKTHJn3y5zqHTGP0BjE1rxsGEBn4h+EzxVCIMVFQUeMVPKPV dlQY9fxdicSGPK2WKo1KL3CVpnYTuNCAVIGA9DPTXPPKvEte+/+xv10I03pj4w87iMUZt7Ca FTO55Gsf8hZvmpuB224yzrAbquA450EUVcQ7KAPcHrph5KAu0d3nwrjrUDn/RWWbyRiVrPtf hmnAAhkSv7oOxzyMdLvqt7XKGKbABhrl1ZRF8QbquOkyu8n3Bz2Osgw7JyFn9N6svlFPmpML UTEi64NewvN6zszKs/zBS6bn7na75gxHNvjSZpSF6uSLYgmKbyG8vkY/i0s0e0njjOHcpNx1 0mNZ+wOoCgHtSCZFyv14ncioJTiSjtZCs+srW9PFlbOg73C1Op42xV5Y+dh/mCC+rweKtB3t yTAy52v8vPG0VjsLS52x6yUsoDjYV33AmTEaWmGzN5t8BX/qh7pgNIEd9TEwrR3B4LjqMmUk XXWSJG5IM8Zr2OE/t2vyuQINBE6Mh9wBEAC/i4Lh4XEgwi/yHr3XLx/+f38ztn5rrk8XRsK2 WUpu5evxw9iK2oelqWtS71XkW57EavJOjvP4t8FWqRKED5jWN741n12iW/EeLx3KoHMcPTfY 4WWvprxiZPfnCIpQ8j8x0QQSA+Hf96BSkAkOGNkiJDuus5z4XwTktn9gFOwLVx4VRMo+lrCy um6BDHI+4/sOWnrNp2WptI4YKM/uA0HpuLpPKLra0ZW6Bp2TewNpAjbst/VHjqewab0PeSCn CQiHkqIibdgOATT0K6KoVtMxp/WPRSfVImfWCHjT2G7HFMcb6w/jlPSb+u4VtL9yn76CCg8F SqTtzFuqPtbXkhrdSgks/grxiQryMXwpO0uSuUgZ3u2TSs+65Bl2CM5cq+2aBIER5qhpnCv7 B00uHuoNqUEK0VEpLKcqi2ZeVM5oO8iOaBgS9Gh082HQ5JDijEV2J5e4rwXjbRnJ4hqpTjSy caW8HnPI+4S0aqVxbnqW7T6l/xnn7ivK3aPqaRKqUSedHCU3oHIU31n0o5+f5htQeDs/Tpzn ARHkyzu9vZ9CvQXk8daZorA+j/38q6mWU6Mw8FRIu1qPQDmqljobk3vC9BZRSJOn3P8jNMM7 w1j+7Da3rxGBylfa3fmHPyY7dvdyeLmsq7egzTJkpAMN55Qat7iuXeeCdBQLAFHLBP1tvwAR AQABiQIfBBgBCAAJAhsMBQJX8tdcAAoJECnERZXWan7EkMgP/isd3lrSsm/8t+U44LY0/x67 cPmiKa9biveywJZ9Y+Zu/pUP44dP670mY7PmEDGC6lRiPKGmhf7vqq6JJFOqX64VWePQ9QZp kkzAUmIJwQ2Kmcmfrs0J5w2Lf5qaNji25fQYbon0eUFy6eN3BNRSIcg0+OsH7HubTWfpZeJu B7V7k8OFt2+HDx7aNdNutDJIu4V25AzGfonARQzJK62cmB0pwYXpcyDO152OwP12XbpXxXA1 xHGYQBRL98pSbMU5xsMw8j9VQHQRS94aT9Qqnz9SrYuISnMV2WGyIE0rAY3GGz3IcN5LVE1N vSP51ih+YJg/qsBYs8obbfEIZelOuznWf120RgV7P+7ZWCSBohmchuyELQzl9D7FXfulkXA3 RapKQcGJMVPIHYgnlvmE0OXfJl1z09nYRQHitoQhWtviHWl7x/KL42aUzHirLR61iVA2kqkO BhU+u+g2w8qrZj+lJfXIxlbVyLOuBVqkfcK28AR9RriB4Q5hvbDeQJMgfZsV2hBt7huBOqkH nnbSCguqfnmwLGkxoM7RVjCQwvC1M57uwdKMlsTVaBP0RreZnrDngLamK+ibXYe7p8pPAWD9 cuHvkkjML7cIfuvbScDYRmGzia3V9+LVzQCm+q/6xUY1SZvrDz7OaJOy3Xb1d+aPhYaNC0TQ 7IqA1dx8rZYQ
Message-ID: <7b2bc00f-49da-4d64-cdb3-01ddfeb69a00@petit-huguenin.org>
Date: Sun, 7 Oct 2018 05:53:48 -0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.9.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <df27ff82-bb5a-8c83-f119-a6f4e9f65a53@nostrum.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="EwNEbZ0vdpr5PTAdToeyrhfSaZosak3w9"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tram/k8oe-kk9bpY-mscIPaFx3RvcNak>
Subject: Re: [tram] Adam Roach's Discuss on draft-ietf-tram-stunbis-16: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: tram@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Sun, 07 Oct 2018 12:53:55 -0000

Hi Adam,

See one more response inline.

Additionally it seems that your DISCUSS is not related to these issues at all, would it be possible to clear it?

Thanks.

On 05/21/2018 11:11 AM, Adam Roach wrote:
> Sorry for taking so long to get back to you on this. Two responses below -- everything else looks good.
> 
> On 5/3/18 6:37 PM, Marc Petit-Huguenin wrote:
>> On 04/23/2018 03:37 PM, Marc Petit-Huguenin wrote:
>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>> §17.3.1:
>>>>
>>>>>   IANA is requested to update the names for attributes 0x0002, 0x0003,
>>>>>   0x0004, 0x0005, 0x0007, and 0x000B, and the reference from RFC 5389
>>>>>   to RFC-to-be for the following STUN methods:
>>>> ...
>>>>>   0x0003: (Reserved; prior to [RFC5389] this was CHANGE-REQUEST)
>>>> The attribute 0x0003 is registered by RFC 5780, and should not be removed by this document.
>>> Fixed.
> 
> 
> Thanks for the change, but the new text still asks IANA to update the table so that 0x0003 points to *this* document, instead of continuing to point to RFC 5780. Since this document does not do anything with CHANGE-REQUEST, this update does not seem correct.
> 
> 
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>> §6.2.3 says:
>>>>
>>>>>   Alternatively, a
>>>>>   client MAY be configured with a set of IP addresses that are trusted;
>>>>>   if a certificate is received that identifies one of those IP
>>>>>   addresses, the client considers the identity of the server to be
>>>>>   verified.
>>>> Presumably, this means the server supplies a certificate with SubjectAltName
>>>> containing an iPAddress? Please add text to clarify whether that's the
>>>> intention.
>>>>
>>>> If that *is* the intended meaning, then this behavior in §8.1 seems
>>>> unnecessarily restrictive:

To align with the modification done in section 8.1. (see my previous email to Benjamin Kaduk), I completely removed the sentence from the next version of the draft.

>>>>
>>>>>   A "stuns" URI
>>>>>   containing an IP address MUST be rejected, unless the domain name is
>>>>>   provided by the same mechanism that provided the STUN URI, and that
>>>>>   domain name can be passed to the verification code.
>>>> Presumably, this is done because certs with iPAddress-form SubjectAltNames are
>>>> pretty rare (although CAB Forum baseline requirements do explicitly allow
>>>> their issuance) -- but if the text in §6.2.3 is based on allowing the use of
>>>> such certs in a TURN deployment, then it seems that URI resolution should be
>>>> also.
>>>>
>>> I am not sure what was the intent there, so I'll work on that later.
>> We addressed all the other comments, but it would be great if you could suggest some text to address that one.
> 
> I'm not sure what was meant either!
> 
> I think we need to untangle what the working group meant to say regarding "trusted IP addresses," the way this protocol is intended to use certs, and whether the prohibition on using IP addresses in "stuns" URIs derives from cert handling or if it has a completely different rationale behind it; and, if the former, ensure that those things that are prohibited or allowed in certs are similarly prohibited or allowed in URIs.
> 
> I can suggest some *behavior*, but unless there is some record of what the WG meant, any such behavior would need to be discussed by the working group, and a consensus would need to be declared by the chairs.
> 
> 
> /a
> 


-- 
Marc Petit-Huguenin
Email: marc@petit-huguenin.org
Blog: https://marc.petit-huguenin.org
Profile: https://www.linkedin.com/in/petithug