Re: [tram] I-D Action: draft-ietf-tram-turnbis-19.txt

Nils Ohlmeier <nohlmeier@mozilla.com> Fri, 10 August 2018 20:59 UTC

Return-Path: <nohlmeier@mozilla.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 C5315130ECC for <tram@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 10 Aug 2018 13:59:23 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.001
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=mozilla.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 HTr5u6ntcWpq for <tram@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 10 Aug 2018 13:59:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pl0-x22e.google.com (mail-pl0-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c01::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 6AAA6130E41 for <tram@ietf.org>; Fri, 10 Aug 2018 13:59:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pl0-x22e.google.com with SMTP id d5-v6so4520865pll.4 for <tram@ietf.org>; Fri, 10 Aug 2018 13:59:20 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mozilla.com; s=google; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=fBNUa+TsLH2brlf4NA7EB2RRcnEwIdgCgo1forhc3sQ=; b=JIKStwDDP4IaCxGtnjn+AF5IrB25r3Qce/3MQHdJCIx3o9xrI78YX06PLfQQfLoTFj EW2/IT6eUTOhWdz6+IJtQ8MTRRsKYFvEVXlYU2q+MAHr2Q0OQbP1ppPZc+dPJ4GENNkJ 6Ht/ydax3/V9g4D2SqXF4FjKHCcHdbhwb13AE=
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=fBNUa+TsLH2brlf4NA7EB2RRcnEwIdgCgo1forhc3sQ=; b=GdLMFR8zwH9ml30MbfTYDSgnSXBOyt2pTeg87vE2BTN5bW+OJWsEZbRiFMlAsozB1G cNVA8MDXfibrTMdycLKUMqEzQWG/LLpegDH6kQjZ1AsWD8RqV4g6o/OFlJ4P9VH3t0JD EBxYbIYMGMuP651c7xByZReo8lMZ3SpGGclRjWnKDJ2YVDnTDk0zPieUSyasEiwzxEW+ qwqG5rmWtIf3bRLrhjpmNuDHGj9Tig22sxFLBUGoRtDF2k+hk5UrsOb52A9bUR/FPoKx ztlc3oDQSq2AgILujr+nDfCCDYPdOrDt3cWZuTwJCB0SRBW6Z30B5IGeAi7PFFeYJstD asFA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOUpUlHmJ4KQmJQBHYi9nrtUUhmtw0BKhI/tGnAoKsOGRPqTwR3g30rK 5LdSXRmS4a6PcGJujUq22vmmwg==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA+uWPx2bwYzQj4J4uKYcVSDqOk9MrePbpqqQlwpXAQJTttIHNeQJNKSAnFVBeccDbRt+DlT7tLIJw==
X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:a50a:: with SMTP id s10-v6mr7394205plq.147.1533934759847; Fri, 10 Aug 2018 13:59:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ?IPv6:2620:101:80fc:224:b9f6:d0b5:aaf1:be2a? ([2620:101:80fc:224:b9f6:d0b5:aaf1:be2a]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id z2-v6sm9905986pgv.12.2018.08.10.13.59.17 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 10 Aug 2018 13:59:18 -0700 (PDT)
From: Nils Ohlmeier <nohlmeier@mozilla.com>
Message-Id: <00B25F74-14C8-43A8-97BD-58981FA9DE01@mozilla.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_89E24078-B9FA-4462-8829-47A79E5DE8F2"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha512
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\))
Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2018 13:59:15 -0700
In-Reply-To: <dd93a90b-7526-056e-582d-58720f9f20c2@akamai.com>
Cc: tram@ietf.org, Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>, Cullen Jennings <fluffy@cisco.com>, Justin Uberti <juberti@google.com>, "Ram Mohan R (rmohanr)" <rmohanr@cisco.com>
To: Brandon Williams <brandon.williams@akamai.com>
References: <152809326560.20924.1993421118096117008@ietfa.amsl.com> <BN6PR16MB14259FA70767BA31FB3E35EBEA670@BN6PR16MB1425.namprd16.prod.outlook.com> <dd93a90b-7526-056e-582d-58720f9f20c2@akamai.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tram/pbUtMPy-ytZunufzRY4KbDekHxo>
Subject: Re: [tram] I-D Action: draft-ietf-tram-turnbis-19.txt
X-BeenThere: tram@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27
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: Fri, 10 Aug 2018 20:59:24 -0000

Hi Brandon,

Mozilla doesn’t own or operate TURN servers or server code.
I’m expecting that Firefox ICE implementation would start to answer STUN bindings requests from the TURN relay right away with no change.
So if I’m not mistaken it should work with a TURN server right away.

Happy to test with a server implementation/prototype any time.

Best regards
  Nils Ohlmeier

> On Aug 10, 2018, at 12:35, Brandon Williams <brandon.williams@akamai.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> The one remaining item that I have been hoping for before submitted
> turnbis for publication is review of permissionless ICE relay support
> from someone who intends to make use of this new feature in the
> protocol. I attempted to get commitments for review from EKR and Cullen
> in Montreal, but they were each busy enough with other things that they
> weren't prepared to make such a commitment. So, with that in mind, I
> have a couple of questions for the list.
> 
> For those of you who have reviewed this new content (namely Nils,
> Justin, and Ram): Have any of you implemented support for this
> capability? Or do you intend to in the near future?
> 
> For the rest of you, is there anyone who has not reviewed the changes
> yet who has implemented these changes?
> 
> I'm mostly concerned about verifying that an implementor has looked at
> this carefully enough to be confident that it can be implemented
> effectively, especially as regards relevant security controls to protect
> the client that is behind a relay that supports this capability.
> 
> I'll appreciate any feedback from the list about this.
> 
> Thanks,
> --Brandon
> 
> On 06/04/2018 02:24 AM, Konda, Tirumaleswar Reddy wrote:
>> This revision addresses comments from Justin.
>> 
>> -Tiru
>> 
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: tram [mailto:tram-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of internet-
>>> drafts@ietf.org
>>> Sent: Monday, June 4, 2018 11:51 AM
>>> To: i-d-announce@ietf.org
>>> Cc: tram@ietf.org
>>> Subject: [tram] I-D Action: draft-ietf-tram-turnbis-19.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-19.txt
>>> 	Pages           : 84
>>> 	Date            : 2018-06-03
>>> 
>>> 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-19
>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-tram-turnbis-19
>>> 
>>> A diff from the previous version is available at:
>>> https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-tram-turnbis-19
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 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
>> 
> 
> --
> Brandon Williams
> Platform Engineering
> Akamai Technologies Inc.