I really feel like this conversation has diverged from any useful purpose. The first question we need to answer is:
- Do we need to support peers behind NATs? Based on the charter and the concepts draft, this is true. If you wish to contest this, please start a new thread to revisit this question in the concepts draft and charter. 2nd question: Do we need to have direct connections between peers most of the time, or can we rely on relays most of the time? This is a use case or application scenario question. Unfortunately, the group never adopted a draft, although there were several drafts that listed various scenarios. However, if you want believe p2psip work should only address use cases that have plenty of relays available, this should still be in a conversation thread labeled for that purpose and probably intended to update the concepts draft. 3rd question: What protocols work in scenarios with peers behind NATs trying to establish direct connections. If you believe this is anything other than TCP when possible, but UDP in an awful lot of cases, please direct your effort toward making ICE-TCP work in MMUSIC, and refer to discussions in MMUSIC for experiences with other solutions. My reading of the current charter, concepts draft, and state of the art for NAT traversal makes me believe that the RELOAD must define a UDP-based overlay link protocol. I hope we can discuss solutions to this problem. But if there is agreement that the requirements are different or need to be changed, let's be explicit in what question we're asking and what draft(s) need(s) to be changed. Those aren't RELOAD questions. Bruce _______________________________________________ P2PSIP mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/p2psip
