IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Tsv-art] [tram] Tsvart last call review of draft-ietf-tram-turnbis-25

Joe Touch <touch@strayalpha.com> Fri, 07 June 2019 09:22 UTC

Return-Path: <touch@strayalpha.com>
X-Original-To: tsv-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tsv-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC24112010D; Fri, 7 Jun 2019 02:22:23 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.219
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.219 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_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NEUTRAL=0.779, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=strayalpha.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 MuapP38CLc_W; Fri, 7 Jun 2019 02:22:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from server217-3.web-hosting.com (server217-3.web-hosting.com [198.54.115.226]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6C5C0120089; Fri, 7 Jun 2019 02:22:22 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=strayalpha.com; s=default; h=To:References:Message-Id: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Cc:Date:In-Reply-To:From:Subject:Mime-Version: Content-Type:Sender:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id: List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=wR4AAKBEsN0ZedRNvRaf7MRGRq0wWjB/XU7G/9JE/tM=; b=fHg8K3MZWnAv8KzkdIcxskLMp Xo2+6kkW8AY6kllQyACgPKLMD7hDUhfMTfqnTh5+FlO9xv4paY3gpOn6zPRqpWBKNt3aQwh4lPhu+ uhbuAK5VthPKxg8d5UvfSrkChy+E2e4ef7AnFtBYWZeSiZu2oY0h1wqbIf3Ecf57nafeKe7CVa8zU DxGfl0512418m+NdNUH3LJSE1YeVIz5Au0/vGLeiMV4fNa8V7FP9rox1f7A6BhQdVXwi/BxcQVjMJ gaAE9LRUoY96U0431LTm5Gig1lAOlf3gcHYY7o71iLYNA3Ky9kL7ZR/kvJsNdDBJbqs3xwCZXMBTc U60dLwZOw==;
Received: from 50-207-123-174-static.hfc.comcastbusiness.net ([50.207.123.174]:62922 helo=[172.20.14.223]) by server217.web-hosting.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from <touch@strayalpha.com>) id 1hZB4i-0000t0-1d; Fri, 07 Jun 2019 05:22:21 -0400
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
From: Joe Touch <touch@strayalpha.com>
X-Mailer: iPad Mail (16F156)
In-Reply-To: <DM5PR16MB1705A4C370C4405AFFD63546EA100@DM5PR16MB1705.namprd16.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Fri, 07 Jun 2019 05:22:15 -0400
Cc: "tsv-art@ietf.org" <tsv-art@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-tram-turnbis.all@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-tram-turnbis.all@ietf.org>, "ietf@ietf.org" <ietf@ietf.org>, "tram@ietf.org" <tram@ietf.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <5F2F8A3B-2887-4107-81E2-B4E222A4044E@strayalpha.com>
References: <155971464360.28104.6837263931145163343@ietfa.amsl.com> <DM5PR16MB170560F51A9F7C281A9BC752EA170@DM5PR16MB1705.namprd16.prod.outlook.com> <F306B122-79F3-4C7A-8CE2-1C094D9F0FCC@strayalpha.com> <DM5PR16MB1705A4C370C4405AFFD63546EA100@DM5PR16MB1705.namprd16.prod.outlook.com>
To: "Konda, Tirumaleswar Reddy" <TirumaleswarReddy_Konda@mcafee.com>
X-OutGoing-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.5
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - server217.web-hosting.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - strayalpha.com
X-Get-Message-Sender-Via: server217.web-hosting.com: authenticated_id: touch@strayalpha.com
X-Authenticated-Sender: server217.web-hosting.com: touch@strayalpha.com
X-Source:
X-Source-Args:
X-Source-Dir:
X-From-Rewrite: unmodified, already matched
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tsv-art/-3X3ZLc88iu72oUU6BMeZx7R7DA>
Subject: Re: [Tsv-art] [tram] Tsvart last call review of draft-ietf-tram-turnbis-25
X-BeenThere: tsv-art@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Transport Area Review Team <tsv-art.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tsv-art>, <mailto:tsv-art-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tsv-art/>
List-Post: <mailto:tsv-art@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tsv-art-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tsv-art>, <mailto:tsv-art-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 07 Jun 2019 09:22:24 -0000


On Jun 7, 2019, at 4:39 AM, Konda, Tirumaleswar Reddy <TirumaleswarReddy_Konda@mcafee.com> wrote:

>>> The specification has two sections 14 and 15 (IP Header Fields for UDP-to-
>> UDP translation and IP Header Fields for TCP-to-UDP translation) to discuss
>> direct translations. https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5766 only covered UDP-to-
>> UDP translation in Section 12.
>> 
>> Yes, but both sections ignore the impact of transport options - both current
>> for TCP and pending for UDP. These are ignored both when packets with
>> such transport options are received (the input packet to the translation) and
>> whether / how they are used on transmit (the output packet)
> 
> TURN is used to relay real-time data (e.g. audio and video streams) and the approach taken by VOIP related specifications 
> is to avoid fragmentation for RTP packets

Sec 2.8 mentions RTP as one use case envisioned (at this point, it’d be fair to ask this revision to clarify whether that turned out to be true). But it isn’t indicated as the only use case. 

Regardless, though, this doesn’t impact the concern raised above. RTP could still employ transport options. 

And my concern on this point goes beyond the issue of fragmentation. It applies to any transport option that might be received and any that might be added in the converted transmission.

Joe

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email