Subject: [BEHAVE] TURN indication numbers

From: Benny Prijono <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2007 19:01:07 +0100

I noticed that in turn-03 the indication numbers (btw what should we 
call this, STUN opcode?) have been changed to:

    0x001  :  Send
    0x002  :  Data
    0x003  :  Connect Status

Although the indication numbers themselves will be unique, the 
opcodes conflict with STUN Binding, Shared-Secret, and TURN Allocate 
requests.

I used to have a function which will print the opcode names, but of 
course the opcode conflict would break this, since now we have to 
look at the message class (request or indication) before deciding 
the name.

Considering that we should have plenty of opcode numbers left 
(12-bits, if my head is right), should we just avoid this conflict?

cheers,
  -benny

_______________________________________________
Behave mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/behave

---

From: Jonathan Rosenberg <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2007 09:03:21 -0400

THis is a known conflict, Rohan discussed it during IETF. It will be 
fixed in the next turn revision.

-Jonathan R.

Benny Prijono wrote:

> Although the indication numbers themselves will be unique, the opcodes 
> conflict with STUN Binding, Shared-Secret, and TURN Allocate requests.
> 
> course the opcode conflict would break this, since now we have to look 
> at the message class (request or indication) before deciding the name.
> 
> Considering that we should have plenty of opcode numbers left (12-bits, 
> if my head is right), should we just avoid this conflict?
> 
> cheers,
>  -benny
> 
> 

-- 
Jonathan D. Rosenberg, Ph.D.                   600 Lanidex Plaza
Cisco Fellow                                   Parsippany, NJ 07054-2711
Cisco Systems
[email-masked]                              FAX:   (973) 952-5050
http://www.jdrosen.net                         PHONE: (973) 952-5000
http://www.cisco.com