Subject: [MMUSIC] ICE-tcp issue: S-O candidates from TURN servers?

From: Jonathan Rosenberg <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2007 16:22:27 -0400

ICE-tcp has, for the last couple of revisions, instructed the client to 
obtain passive, active and S-O candidates from a TURN server. The open 
issue is, do we really need S-O candidates from a TURN server?

If the TURN server is always north of the northernmost NAT (I.e., on the 
public Internet), then the answer is no. The S-O candidate is useless 
and passive is fine. Another issue is, if the TURN server is to provide 
S-O candidates, it would have to implement the nasty socket API stuff in 
the appendix of ice-tcp and it would be hard for it to figure out how 
many sockets to allocate. Also, more candidates takes more time to 
gather and check.

So, I'd propose to remove S-O candidates from being gathered by the STUN 
server. Any objections?

-Jonathan R.
-- 
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

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

---

From: "Adam Fisk" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2007 20:02:36 -0400

I support the change.  I personally have no plans to create TURN servers
behind NATs, although doing so is not a completely crazy idea.  A p2p CDN
where relays are sometimes required that wants to distribute load comes to
mind.  Nodes behind NATs that play well with TCP S-O could be TURN servers.
That would be pretty neat, but I'd be surprised if anyone implemented it in
the foreseeable future.

Maybe you just make it a MAY implement?

-Adam