On Mon, Jul 27, 2009 at 6:47 PM, Eric Rescorla<[email protected]> wrote: > However, it seems to me that this same effect could be achieved > simply by having the DAP actually be a TURN server. The client > could then connect to the TURN server and through it to the > RP. You get the same message paths, but there's no additional > protocol mechanisms required to tell anyone that this is > a client--everything just works. It also has the additional advantage > that because TURN servers have public IPs, you know you won't > have to send OAP-DAP messages through the overlay. >
This doesn't work when peers can be behind NATs. There's no way to ensure that the responsible peer has a public IP and can be a TURN server. I think the concept of allowing a client to be contacted by routing a message to the client's Node-ID regardless of whether it is directly attached or not is a very useful one. I think a couple minor changes might be needed to the base draft to allow an extension or usage to specify how to do/manage this behavior, but I believe it's definitely worth the effort. Bruce _______________________________________________ P2PSIP mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/p2psip
