Re: [Uri-review] End of Last Call for draft-ietf-behave-turn-uri

Ted Hardie <> Tue, 10 November 2009 03:55 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 134593A6A24; Mon, 9 Nov 2009 19:55:42 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.572
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.572 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.027, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Q+BTpyiPcukW; Mon, 9 Nov 2009 19:55:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD1B63A6921; Mon, 9 Nov 2009 19:55:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: by pwi6 with SMTP id 6so836211pwi.29 for <multiple recipients>; Mon, 09 Nov 2009 19:56:05 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=pL/JMaaLqHVvBSLnlPp3rrDykABUoN1hAdFwC6MrP6M=; b=OM2Q9YoLtRJjlYuPOrZXo1+hVLnZLVM24Q+oqbr4zx5HWtdICX7SkLvsYGi3IoQyzE EcPZUyNNGwVFXecPwqry5LWR00er/93PE6WX3EYUxRfV8ZRv797jMXBRcTsnBcL9vwW7 JR0B3IS/r4zCa+P4lW7L3Q1F4l8EfGWqH7VM4=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=xJ70Hub4j+pCpjgtyY3fstoGIxU7X5EfYnXHH/wg63ZhtZuhcTr7aIiQ/C/VdQqM68 qJhKDLnmBBz2zIvcVzfo4hDbqGP5oU1c3r8A+hsTguwF90o1RngKl2cwhJFUqhFt68Sy n6ivVw5jNP3L8rpZPrWD16MWp/A8fXp1+1WMc=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by with SMTP id p2mr860756wfn.136.1257825363463; Mon, 09 Nov 2009 19:56:03 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <>
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2009 19:56:03 -0800
Message-ID: <>
From: Ted Hardie <>
To: Marc Petit-Huguenin <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc:, "" <>,, "" <>
Subject: Re: [Uri-review] End of Last Call for draft-ietf-behave-turn-uri
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Proposed URI Schemes <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2009 03:55:42 -0000

Hi Marc,

Thanks for the changes; I thought you had suggested using new
productions, rather than re-using the existing ones from the
URI mechanism.  Sorry if I did not reply on that--I think that would
be a good idea, but if there is rough consensus for the current approach,
I am happy to go along.


Ted Hardie

On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 10:29 AM, Marc Petit-Huguenin <>; wrote:
> I just released a new version of this I-D incorporating all the modifications
> requested during Last Call:
> There was only one major modification in this new version, which is the
> filtering of the list of preferred TURN transport when the scheme is "turns", to
> prevent the use an UDP or TCP transport in this case.  The reference
> implementation was updated to reflect this and is available here:
> I made some proposals during the discussion that were never acknowledged, so
> here the list of them, this the modification made in the new version of the I-D:
> - Ted Hardie found confusing to reuse elements from the hierarchical URI syntax
> when the URI is opaque.  No more guidance was provided[1], so I just added a
> sentence explaining this.
> - In the same thread, Ted Hardie pointed out that the text didn't explained
> clearly that the list of preferred transports was not an input for the TURN
> parser but for the resolution algorithm.  The I-D was modified as proposed[1].
> - Following the secdir review, Pasi Eronen requested some additional text to
> deal with TLS.  The I-D was modified as proposed[2].
> - Following the security bug discovered by Margaret Wasserman, I started a
> discussion[3] on the BEHAVE mailing-list asking if it was OK to be able to use a
> TLS transport even if a "turn:" scheme was used.  There was no subsequent
> discussion on this, so the I-D now prevents to use a UDP or TCP transport if a
> "turns:" scheme is used, but does not prevent using a TLS transport if a "turn:"
> scheme is used.
> - Following the ops-dir review by Margaret Wasserman, I started a discussion[4]
> on the BEHAVE mailing-list for opinions on the implicit processing in the I-D.
> There was no subsequent discussion on this, so the implicit processing was not
> modified in the I-D.
> - The last iteration of the modifications[5] for the algorithms steps were
> integrated in the I-D.
> Here's the full changelog:
>   o  Improved the algorithm steps.
>   o  It is possible to use a TLS transport event if the scheme is
>      turn:.
>   o  Clarified when to stop the resolution with an error in step 2.
>   o  Added transport list filtering process.
>   o  Improved security section following sec-dir review.
>   o  Fixed nits reported by gen-art review.
>   o  Added example for remote hosting.
>   o  Removed URIs section.
>   o  Editorial modification.
> Many thanks to all the reviewers.
> [1]
> [2]
> [3]
> [4]
> [5]
> --
> Marc Petit-Huguenin
> Personal email:
> Professional email:
> Blog:
> _______________________________________________
> Uri-review mailing list