IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Simon Perreault <sperreault@jive.com> Thu, 18 September 2014 15:04 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 514BD1A0487 for <tram@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 18 Sep 2014 08:04:17 -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 L4IdhlQti6Al for <tram@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 18 Sep 2014 08:04:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-la0-f53.google.com (mail-la0-f53.google.com [209.85.215.53]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9E5C21A046B for <tram@ietf.org>; Thu, 18 Sep 2014 08:04:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-la0-f53.google.com with SMTP id ge10so1298846lab.40 for <tram@ietf.org>; Thu, 18 Sep 2014 08:04:09 -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=AtT7IoWqwdsh7LYt9WiqXFPzhffuMhVIGkkVLLF4tog=; b=PoOLw/LbTGki3dckRR1W+p7rY9GEB0Yfp8YjLfIbnVSCumQumy/wX0J+GwHnYmZPoL WqDqHKtE0ooza7uaiZnMI1S/cHbd6NIyIFAEHKPVRzH2hs/Ez3qw1A/MBQYMZ0bU57pq kAEMprpGN5B2xYaLRyNcUTGlSlAQ3UiKr/O0xZ2VltRyegknx8Ypz2wfd10VQkUdB218 pymalN70phsB6LI+J7Vclyebpzjj95FpxLaFN909/NGVb5W4f3VrMQMsDcibIpXsUKXC KFeAmM6QYSrgcEWj5a8KWKwNSoKakzr8cm773PaYlFOaXbIHlFtiScgNwhfEbxOEu/J/ OXVg==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmCbBdWEhKOs01OvyEiBOaBhvJGn1G+e50WelK1g/33iftmr6VdmpbULfMgnbO/CDHneQJH
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.152.42.209 with SMTP id q17mr219582lal.43.1411052649849; Thu, 18 Sep 2014 08:04:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.25.137.6 with HTTP; Thu, 18 Sep 2014 08:04:09 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CABkgnnXcGRCb9r_f17YEEfVxuiWbySBe+CQnv-Dj9YgH_WdNEA@mail.gmail.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> <CABkgnnXcGRCb9r_f17YEEfVxuiWbySBe+CQnv-Dj9YgH_WdNEA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2014 11:04:09 -0400
Message-ID: <CANO7kWDeVFJq5i0iLxc7VqMS=OdMYPT-h3OcGt3k=Bzi+WuF3w@mail.gmail.com>
From: Simon Perreault <sperreault@jive.com>
To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a11c34b6cf438170503584bd1"
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tram/wxGsh2j4ZmOyHJFyDfJCtHcd9Bk
Cc: "Prashanth Patil (praspati)" <praspati@cisco.com>, Gonzalo Salgueiro <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: Thu, 18 Sep 2014 15:04:17 -0000

On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 9:51 AM, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
wrote:

> > How else would normal Binding requests be identified? I mean, I don't
> have a use case, but as an implementer I need to know what ALPN label to
> use.
>
> I can't imagine wrapping a Binding request in a (D)TLS handshake in any
> scenario. It is usually the other easy around.
>

Agreed. But can we agree that if someone did want to do it, one could
rightfully expect it to work?


> And, in those cases where you are sending Binding requests, your goal
> isn't to do STUN. That isn't the application protocol, it's something like
> RTP, or that thing your game talks, or some new STUN usage that really does
> something.
>

Correct. So if I'm developing a game, and I'm using STUN to punch holes in
the NAT for my game protocol to go through, what do I use as ALPN label?
"stun.X-my-awesome-game"? I'm a developer, not a protocol designer, so just
tell me please.

I think we should tell those developers to use "stun".

Simon

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email