On Dec 23, 2009, at 2:49 AM, Ari Keranen wrote: > jc wrote: >> On Dec 22, 2009, at 7:50 AM, Ari Keranen wrote: >>> Is this (explicitly) stated somewhere in the draft? If so, also I >>> have missed it. If it isn't, perhaps it should be. >> The RELOAD port is clearly documented in draft. Isn't this enough? > > IMHO, not really. > > There many are cases where you could want to run RELOAD on a non-standard > port. For example, if the RELOAD port is already reserved by some other > application (everyone doesn't follow the IANA recommendations), or you want > to run multiple instances of RELOAD on a single machine using different > ports, or perhaps you are behind a middlebox from which you can get a port > forwarded but can't decide the exact port number, or maybe you just don't > want your ISP to easily detect (by looking just into port numbers) that > you're using RELOAD. > >>> And what about if a node wants to use a different port number for >>> TLS and DTLS? I think Jouni's proposal for explicit port numbers >>> per protocol and structured bootstrap-node element makes sense. >> Nowhere in the draft is dual-stack nor dual-transport ever mentioned. > > For example AttachReq lets you define the transport protocol to use. Doesn't > that imply that you are free to mix UDP and TCP (DTLS and TLS) connections in > the overlay?
Your assuming all connection setup uses AttachReq which is false. You may have missed what I said, if you re-read you will see that I mix TCP and UDP freely but it isn't discussed in draft. > >> Having said that a Bootstrap Node would never listen on two ports >> with two different transport protocols, its one transport protocol or >> the other. My implementation decision doesn't roll over into the >> draft. Keep in mind that the draft doesn't outline this scenario >> whatsoever and it introduces several caveats. > > I think it would make sense to do like your implementation does; but in > addition support different ports. What kind of caveats did you have in mind? Well for one the discussion on which transport to use for bootstrap and under what conditions? I currently use UDP and fallback to TCP for bootstrapping. I prefer UDP however it very well may be blocked. > >> IMHO the topology-plugin element should provide transport and or >> ciphersuite information because RELOAD isn't smart enough to choose >> DTLS over TLS and so on. Only the topology plugin can supply this >> recommendation to the underlying base. > > Maybe, but likely even the topology plugin can't know whether TCP or UDP is a > better choice before running ICE. ICE is generally run before anything by the topology plugin. It is up to the topology plugin to decide which of the ICE transports to use once ICE negotiation has completed. > > > Cheers, > Ari _______________________________________________ P2PSIP mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/p2psip
