I also want to add that there are some folks on the list (and I directly know of a bunch more) who are interested in using this protocol for special purpose things that are definitely not running on the Internet. For example, sensor networks, emergency response, ad-hoc etc. They have an interest in things being very small (mote sized), low message count (battery/radio issues) and want to be able to run without ICE (and without certificates or TLS as well, for that matter).
I definitely think that most people using this for normal environments need to be using ICE for NAT traversal (for example, folks may say they will "not need ICE" for an enterprise deployment, but over time, they very well may need ICE (a remote party, teleworker, whatever) and they should really go implement ICE). We should to be continue to very clear that ICE is the mechanism we use in deployments where there is any chance there will be a NAT. I just think we should try to keep in mind that, perhaps more than other WGs, we have some folks who want to do unusual things, and some of them justifiable don't need ICE. David (as individual) On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 3:05 PM, Cullen Jennings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > One topic that's come up in a number of implementations that I'm > familiar with is that doing ICE from the get-go imposes a significant > implementation hurdle. Since there are settings in which ICE isn't > necessary, this raises the question of whether it makes sense > to have a trivial version of Attach (previously Connect) which > does not use ICE. > > The tricky thing here is that even in situations where full ICE > is not needed it's attractive to offer two addresses, one inside > and one outside the NAT, so now we end up defining some kind of > ICE lite lite, which tends towards the complexity of ICE as we > want to handle just one more case. > > A middle ground would be to allow ICE lite support. > _______________________________________________ > P2PSIP mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/p2psip > -- David A. Bryan [EMAIL PROTECTED] +1.757.565.0101 x101 +1.757.565.0088 (fax) www.SIPeerior.com _______________________________________________ P2PSIP mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/p2psip
