Subject: [tram] Spencer Dawkins' Yes on draft-ietf-tram-stun-origin-05: (with COMMENT)

From: "Spencer Dawkins" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2015 09:36:14 -0700

Spencer Dawkins has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-tram-stun-origin-05: Yes

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

Please refer to http://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tram-stun-origin/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Just to keep the IESG in the loop, without revising the document during
balloting ...

In discussion in Dallas, the editor agreed to remove this sentence from
Section 2. of draft-ietf-stun-origin:

"The size of ORIGINs included in a STUN message can have a major impact
on the size of a STUN packet, and could potentially cause UDP
fragmentation."

This mention of fragmentation had raised the possibility of requiring
support for SCTP in STUN and other things that there was no interest in
doing, so the decision was to just remove this non-normative statement. 
Also, this statement is highly speculative as there are no known use
cases where multiple ORIGINs will be included for WebRTC, SIP, or XMPP.